Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Serious and MATURE conversations about Christianity
User avatar
NeoJabez
Council Operations
Council Operations
Posts: 10250
Joined: June 5th, 2005, 7:00 am

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by NeoJabez » December 14th, 2017, 7:08 pm

Oh well, internet. Twas fun while it lasted. Guess we'll have to go out and play soon. heh
word count: 19
If serving is below you, leadership is beyond you. - Anonymous

Coram Deo, Soli Deo Gloria

Image

User avatar
Globalkoas
Council Advisor
Council Advisor
Posts: 3880
Joined: February 2nd, 2005, 7:00 am

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Globalkoas » December 14th, 2017, 8:05 pm

the good ole days...

Image
word count: 4
#RomansMissYa!
94
https://youtu.be/ea5A8wEIwIg

User avatar
NeoJabez
Council Operations
Council Operations
Posts: 10250
Joined: June 5th, 2005, 7:00 am

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by NeoJabez » December 14th, 2017, 10:08 pm

If you guys haven't seen Ryvaldus' post on this on FB, someone (Ginger, I'm looking at you!) should probably share it here.

Nice, Globey! I've never seen your workspace before! Lots of Caterpillar equipment!
word count: 37
If serving is below you, leadership is beyond you. - Anonymous

Coram Deo, Soli Deo Gloria

Image

User avatar
Eliter
CC Member
CC Member
Posts: 580
Joined: April 2nd, 2014, 10:11 pm
Location: Western United States
Contact:

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Eliter » December 20th, 2017, 12:14 am

Sorry for the less sincere note, but I remember a scene from somewhere in the Gilmore Girls as the grandmother replaced their internet package with a better one, and (I forgot the mother's name) started complaining about how she enjoyed how slow the internet was going....

I'm just curious if any of you want to post a meme about that.
word count: 62
~Eliter
Jesus wrote:father forgive them they know not what they do.

User avatar
NeoJabez
Council Operations
Council Operations
Posts: 10250
Joined: June 5th, 2005, 7:00 am

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by NeoJabez » December 20th, 2017, 12:33 am

Honestly, at the risk of angering a few people with this comment...

Net neutrality was brought into being by the Obama administration, had very few teeth, and now it's gone.

Before net neutrality ISPs were keeping people from torrenting, or severely slowing them. Yes, now there's streaming and all of that, so there DOES need to be something in place that keeps ISPs from throttling everyone across the board, and they shouldn't literally cause prices to rise for pretty much all networked communication, having said that...Net neutrality wasn't the be all, end all.

The companies in question are being watched by consumers and government closely, if they do change things, my guess is that it will be gradual. And honestly, even if the internet ceased operating tomorrow, it wouldn't be doomsday.
word count: 137
If serving is below you, leadership is beyond you. - Anonymous

Coram Deo, Soli Deo Gloria

Image

User avatar
Tobekan
Posts: 62
Joined: December 18th, 2017, 11:29 am
Battle.net Profile: tobekan#1266

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Tobekan » December 20th, 2017, 3:59 pm

I will always lean towards whatever option has the least amount of government involvement. Competition among companies will eventually lower prices and increase the service. Not over night, but over time it will get better. I am always for freedom and the web.
word count: 43

User avatar
Eliter
CC Member
CC Member
Posts: 580
Joined: April 2nd, 2014, 10:11 pm
Location: Western United States
Contact:

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Eliter » December 24th, 2017, 12:06 am

Ya know, I thought of this, and here is what I think.

I think there needs to be a balance. I think total, complete, absolute capitalism is a bad thing. I also think complete socialism to be a bad thing.

I mean, take credit cards for example. People hop between stores and swipe their cards without taking the extra minute to think if this is an honest business. However, We have made certain standards across-the-board, making sure businesses are honest. Will call this concept "fraud", and we take care of it.

With total capitalism, you would have the economy take care of itself, or so you hope. If a business starts getting a reputation of stealing from customers, people wouldn't want to buy from them, and they would go out of business. This would make businesses not try and do that. Or so you hope.

I think there are two absolutely horrible extremes on both sides to everything, and I don't think anyone should just hop on and pick a the same side every time. A government should be a government, otherwise another government takes over. There's a purpose and a reason for a government. People need to be people, otherwise you have no government and no one to govern, making both people and government useless.

I think coming to the realization of the need for less government isn't bad. But I think once that once you some come to a that conclusion, I don't think every single chance you have to lessen government just for the sake of chopping government is a rational, good thing.

I guess why I am saying this is because I've been seeing people say (basically) "I know nothing about this issue, just whatever sounds like less government is good with me!" And I'd just like to point out that the government needs to be in certain areas, and that people need to determine where the government needs to be in and where it doesn't, because there is a reason and a purpose for a government.

This poster is particularly biased towards keeping net neutrality, but what I'm trying to get across is maybe the government needs to be involved in this area maybe not, but gutting the government just for the sake of gutting it isn't a good thing.

edit1 in red
edit2 in light blue
edit3 in this color
word count: 408
~Eliter
Jesus wrote:father forgive them they know not what they do.

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:

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Imagine Wagons » December 25th, 2017, 1:07 pm

The problem with this eliter is that the government cant control what is permitted due to freedom of speech and freedom of press. The internet would be considered part of speech and press, so no the Government SHOULD NOT control what comes and goes, and data as well. Like said before why should me the person at the end of the line who is getting less speed than the people in front of me, as well getting much slower speeds because of it. The FCC can only imply regulations when it comes to the internet, they only regulate over the air waves (Local stations) and wireless signals.

Title 2 makes it so that the government has complete control over the internet, and not only that has the option to restrict certain traffic, and allows the government to make an artifical monopoly on ISPs because of this, it makes start up ISPs and brick and mortar ISPs impossible to enter the market. So no this isnt a good idea.
word count: 168
Image

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 26th, 2017, 12:36 am

Since you people like reading, thought i would post this here.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Release ... 5-24A1.pdf

This here is the Net Neutrality document that you can find on the FCCs site (although i did find this from another site that was talking about it back from 2015)

The first thing i went looking for was title 2 which i found on page 12-13 which i will copy and paste here
B. Promoting Investment with a Modern Title II
37. Today, our forbearance approach results in over 700 codified rules being inapplicable, a
“light-touch” approach for the use of Title II. This includes no unbundling of last-mile facilities, no
tariffing, no rate regulation, and no cost accounting rules, which results in a carefully tailored application
of only those Title II provisions found to directly further the public interest in an open Internet and more,
better, and open broadband. Nor will our actions result in the imposition of any new federal taxes or fees;
the ability of states to impose fees on broadband is already limited by the congressional Internet tax
moratorium.
38. This is Title II tailored for the 21st Century. Unlike the application of Title II to
incumbent wireline companies in the 20th Century, a swath of utility-style provisions (including tariffing)
will not be applied. Indeed, there will be fewer sections of Title II applied than have been applied to
Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS), where Congress expressly required the application of
Sections 201, 202, and 208, and permitted the Commission to forbear from others. In fact, Title II has
never been applied in such a focused way.
39. History demonstrates that this careful approach to the use of Title II will not impede
investment. First, mobile voice services have been regulated under a similar light-touch Title II approach
since 1994 — and investment and usage boomed.
29 For example, between 1993 and 2009 (while voice
was the primary driver of mobile revenues), the mobile industry invested more than $271 billion in
building out networks, during a time in which industry revenues increased by 1300 percent and
subscribership grew over 1600 percent.30
Moreover, more recently, Verizon Wireless has invested tens of
billions of dollars in deploying mobile wireless services since being subject to the 700 MHz C Block open
access rules, which overlap in significant parts with the open Internet rules we adopt today.
31
But that is
not all. Today, key provisions of Title II apply to certain enterprise broadband services that AT&T has described as “the epicenter of the broadband investment” the Commission seeks to promote.32
Title II has
been maintained by more than 1000 rural local exchange carriers that have chosen to offer their DSL and
fiber broadband services as common carrier offerings. And, of course, wireline DSL was regulated as a
common-carrier service until 2005—including a period in the late ‘90s and the first five years of this
century that saw the highest levels of wireline broadband infrastructure investment to date.33
40. In any event, recent events have demonstrated that our rules will not disrupt capital
markets or investment. Following recent discussions of the potential application of Title II to consumer
broadband, investment analysts have issued reports concluding that Title II with appropriate forbearance
is unlikely to alter broadband provider conduct or have any negative effect on their value or future
profitability.34
Executives from large broadband providers have also repeatedly represented to investors
that the prospect of regulatory action will not influence their investment strategies or long-term
profitability; indeed, Sprint has gone so far to say that it “does not believe that a light touch application of
Title II, including appropriate forbearance, would harm the continued investment in, and deployment of,
mobile broadband services.”35
Finally, the recent AWS auction, conducted under the prospect of Title II
regulation, generated bids (net of bidding credits) of more than $41 billion—further demonstrating that
robust investment is not inconsistent with a light-touch Title II regime.36
What is your opinion on this?
word count: 681

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest