Support NeoGAF

[ezekial45]

My hope is that a lot of the bigger companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon will step up and try to protest this, as I'm these measures will damage online businesses going forward. Since they're designed entirely around the open internet.

In the next few years, I can see Ajit Pai becoming one of the most hated people on the internet. He's ready to gut the internet, and all for fucking money. This is fucking horrible.

 

[Cipherr]

Such fucking bullshit.

Would be nice if things like this spawned 20 pages of outrage, but I suppose that's expecting too much.

 

[Mango Positive]

Bleed the middle class until they're dry and make sure the poorest people lose access completely. I think it's pretty obvious where and what America will be in ten years.

Land of Millionaire Heads on Pikes.

I'm learning how to build guillotines in anticipation!

 

[BasilZero]

No ;(

Dark times ahead of true....

 

[xeroborn55]

dear god...

that image is horrifying

 

[Kaako]

This is how it all crumbles.

 

[Not]

In the next few years, I can see Ajit Pai becoming one of the most hated people on the internet. He's ready to gut the internet, and all for fucking money. This is fucking horrible.

As long as he still hates women and minorities, pretty sure a major chunk of the Internet will be on his side no matter what

 

[ErasureAcer]

If net neutrality overthrow goes through then it is time to boycott the internet.

 

[Isaac Otherworld]

We need a better naming for this concept thsn "net neutrality" something like "free and fair internet" immediately. Net neutrality puts people to sleep.

 

[SpaceCadetKeon]

He said months ago that he was going to do it, and now he's doing it. Fuck Ajit Pai, fuck Donald Trump, and fuck everyone who voted for him.

 

[NOLA_Gaffer]

Essentially the IPS inserting itself between the content provider and the user, and demanding to be paid based on completely arbitrary metrics.

They want to take the cable TV model and apply it to the internet. Be the gatekeeper, charge everyone for very specific access with tiered services and lock down information.

I would stop using the internet before I started paying for this nonsense.

 

[xeroborn55]

My hope is that a lot of the bigger companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon will step up and try to protest this, as I'm these measures will damage online businesses going forward. Since they're designed entirely around the open internet.

In the next few years, I can see Ajit Pai becoming one of the most hated people on the internet. He's ready to gut the internet, and all for fucking money. This is fucking horrible.

this is a great point. i imagine that the big companies like amazon and facebook would be vehemently against this.

 

[WillyFive]

Ok to say that this is bullshit would be an understatement. That sounds fucking criminal. Like, it doesn't matter if they make it legal, everyone knows it's wrong on every fucking barometer that exists. What's the "official" argument to push something so obviously malicious through?

Using techniques like advertising it as if it's a deal to the general population.

For example, let's say Comcast enforces a cap of 500 GB a month. They can announce that they are offering a great new deal for costumers where you can watch Hulu all you want and it won't be counted against your data cap.

That sounds awesome, right? Except now it means Netflix, Youtube, Amazon Prime, and any other competitor suddenly can't compete because viewers will be punished for using them by having it count against their cap.

However, Camcast will love to give those services the same data free deal though, they just gotta pay a couple of million dollars so that they can use their infrastructure and be data-free for Comcast costumers.

 

[mreddie]

Today is literally seeing America go down the shitter only because Dump didn't do shit these 100 days.

Month 4.

 

[Not]

We need a better naming for this concept thsn "net neutrality" something like "free and fair internet" immediately. Net neutrality puts people to sleep.

John Oliver dubbed it "cable company fuckery"

 

[To Far Away Times]

I don't stand with a lot of you guys on many issues, but this is certainly one where I'm on your side. It's insanity to think that this is even a remote possibility.

This image, and things like it, have any of the ISPs actually came out (publicly or even privately), that this is their ultimate goal or is all of this just a complete and total theoretical worst case scenario type of deal?

They won't come out and say it publicly, but since ISPs function as competition-free monopolies for their area, and this would be 100% legal, there is no incentive for the ISPs not too. They've been lobbying and throwing tons of money at breaking up Net Neutrality. Virtually every Republican congressman took money from the telecom companies too in the their last election cycle.

 

[Maximus.]

This is dumb. It's already been talked about, companies spoke, net neutrality won. Now it's doing the same thing again but with an agenda to remove the net neutrality rules and act like this is what people want. People have already spoken and said they want net neutrality.

 

[WillyFive]

We need a better naming for this concept thsn "net neutrality" something like "free and fair internet" immediately. Net neutrality puts people to sleep.

Making names for things is something only the Republicans are good at. Democrats are horrific at it.

 

[Not]

This is dumb. It's already been talked about, companies spoke, net neutrality won. Now it's doing the same thing again but with an agenda to remove the net neutrality rules and act like this is what people want. People have already spoken and said they want net neutrality.

It's almost as if corporations with lots of money don't give two-eighths of a fuck what most people want

 

[ffdgh]

Essentially the ISP inserting itself between the content provider and the user, and demanding to be paid based on completely arbitrary metrics.

They want to take the cable TV model and apply it to the internet. Be the gatekeeper, charge everyone for very specific access with tiered services and lock down information.

So this is how the internet potentially dies...

 

[Ogodei]

You can't enforce Net Neutrality without Title II. Supreme Court said so.

EFF needs to sue. At the very least Pai would have to be boldfaced about saying that Net Neutrality is dead, instead of offering a fig-leaf to consumer protection.

 

[To Far Away Times]

It's almost as if corporations with lots of money don't give two-eighths of a fuck what most people want

They are hell bent on it. First SOPA, then PIPA, then the TPP, and now Ajit Pai's relentless corporate assault on consumers.

 

[dgdas9]

He's right. The more heavily you regulate an industry, the less things will be produced for a given price. But it's not like there's a perfect market at work here. ISPs are natural monopolies, and sometimes their investments were partially paid by government. And not having Net Neutrality will have a distortion effect on the internet itself; it may be suitable for lower income countries where access to the internet is not a given, though even than that's debatable, but not for a developed country.

It's positively unwarranted to maintain an uncompetitive market unregulated at this stage.

 

[Ladekabel]

Where will people get these alt-right memes if they won't be able to access Facebook?

 

[Omegasquash]

This is dumb. It's already been talked about, companies spoke, net neutrality won. Now it's doing the same thing again but with an agenda to remove the net neutrality rules and act like this is what people want. People have already spoken and said they want net neutrality.

If we're talking people. the people spoke and they wanted Hillary. Look at all the good the "people speaking" has done for us.

That isn't intended to downplay citizen activism at all...the more, the better. It's more meant to highlight that the administration and the GOP don't care what the people want.

 

[Isaac Otherworld]

Making names for things is something only the Republicans are good at. Democrats are horrific at it.

If I recall, Net Neutrality came from sn academic paper and was never meant to be used politicslly.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

never forget:

 

[Just_myles]

Essentially the ISP inserting itself between the content provider and the user, and demanding to be paid based on completely arbitrary metrics.

They want to take the cable TV model and apply it to the internet. Be the gatekeeper, charge everyone for very specific access with tiered services and lock down information.

This is terrifying. I don't see any innovation coming out of this. I just see politicians derailing good policy while lining their pockets.

 

[Shard]

They are hell bent on it. First SOPA, then PIPA, then the TPP, and now Ajit Pai's relentless corporate assault on consumers.

Those first three all failed so you know this can be fought and has before.

 

[WhateverItTakes]

A true wetdream for any of the US big ISP companies. Man I hope we'll never get this crap in Europe...

I think you guys will be fine.

Meanwhile in Brexit country:

 

[Pop-O-Matic]

Those first three all failed so you know this can be fought and has before.

The deck gets stacked against us more and more each time, though. It feels like we're just trying to stave off the inevitable at this point.

 

[theechrisfox]

Guess I'm going to need some envelopes and stamps to pay bills. This 1800's era but stupid as fuck administration is paving the way for huge increases in the postal sector.

 

[Pop-O-Matic]

Guess I'm going to need some envelopes and stamps to pay bills. This 1800's era but stupid as fuck administration is paving the way for huge increases in the postal sector.

I'm sure that UPS and FedEx must be elated, since this administration is probably gonna end up gutting USPS too.

 

[Alcotholic]

I knew this would come back since it first didn't pass. ISPs will be fighting harder than before for this and if it does come to pass, I'm willing to forgo internet. I can learn to live without or in limited access at public spaces like cafe.

 

[Zolo]

I knew this would come back since it first didn't pass. ISPs will be fighting harder than before for this and if it does come to pass, I'm willing to forgo internet. I can learn to live without or in limited access at public spaces like cafe.

I have to admit I'm curious what the backlash would be to the population having to pay more when basically everyone in the world uses the internet.

 

[Sponge]

Well, I'm terrified.

 

[TyrantII]

I don't stand with a lot of you guys on many issues, but this is certainly one where I'm on your side. It's insanity to think that this is even a remote possibility.

This image, and things like it, have any of the ISPs actually came out (publicly or even privately), that this is their ultimate goal or is all of this just a complete and total theoretical worst case scenario type of deal?

It won't happen over night, but with responsibility only to shareholders I don't see how this isn't the end game. ISPs are more like utilities than anything else, and the prospects for extracting rent are there.

They already tried this by trying to charge Netflix for delivering data to their customers because Netflix was popular. It's what broke out the initial fight.

Once they extract rent from the companies that can pay, end users on the other side will be next. Then you get vertical integration, such as Comcast charging you more for others streaming services while offering their for free.

There's money to be made by putting tolls on the road and arbitratier of who can pass.

 

[TyrantII]

I'm sure that UPS and FedEx must be elated, since this administration is probably gonna end up gutting USPS too.

Both actually used subsidized USPS cargo flights to get their packages around and also rely on USPS as the end of route delivery in some of the most rural areas.

So I don't think so, at least at this point. The taxpayer are helping to subsidize their business in that regard, but it does actually benefit all.

 

[Lord Frieza]

Today is literally seeing America go down the shitter only because Dump didn't do shit these 100 days.

Month 4.

Huh? Trump has done tons of shit in his first 100 Days. Just most of the big stuff has either been blocked or gone down in flames.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Ideally, Tech industry would fight this tooth and nail.

But I feel like they have just accepted that this is going to happen.

 

[avaya]

My hope is that a lot of the bigger companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon will step up and try to protest this, as I'm these measures will damage online businesses going forward. Since they're designed entirely around the open internet.

In the next few years, I can see Ajit Pai becoming one of the most hated people on the internet. He's ready to gut the internet, and all for fucking money. This is fucking horrible.

Actually....those companies are conflicted because it virtually guarantees a solid barrier to entry for any potential start-up that could threaten them. They have the scale and resources, if they go down the pay route they can easily afford it.

They are very unlikely to fight this hard to any great extent.

Gorsuch means this is very likely going to get done without the need for a new Telecommunications Act.

 

[EatinOlives]

Netflix, Amazon, Google, and Facebook NEED to throw unbelievable amounts of money to fight this. This is their livelihoods at stake.

 

[Shredderi]

So could you technically have a maverick good guy ISP pop up that has the selling point of not doing any of this shit, even though the law would allow it to? Wouldn't everyone just flock to that ISP then?

 

[eosos]

Nice, the free market will come up with a solution. Wait nevermind, there are legal ISP monopolies fml

 

[dgdas9]

A true wetdream for any of the US big ISP companies. Man I hope we'll never get this crap in Europe...

We already get this crap. Zero Rating, which some consider only a cousin of Net Neutrality (though I wouldn't), has not been eliminated under EU guidelines, it's up the member states to regulate there.

In my country (Portugal), the state cozy ISP is already selling new plans where you use an app (!) to choose what 5 apps you'll be given an extra 10GB of data to use on. My Telecom (not the same), for example, texts every other month to remind me I have an extra 5 GB to use on Youtube alone and that Spotify/Facebook/Instagram/Snapchat/WhatsApp data is free. And of those, Spotify's paying for the privilege I think, they were really keen on what I thought of Spotify's promotion when I took their survey, and only tangentially asked about the other platforms.

 

[TyrantII]

This is dumb. It's already been talked about, companies spoke, net neutrality won. Now it's doing the same thing again but with an agenda to remove the net neutrality rules and act like this is what people want. People have already spoken and said they want net neutrality.

Speaking is votes. Voters stabbed Obama in the back and made sure everything that he accomplished would be rolled back by refusing to vote in the person most likely to continue his policies, and at the very least protect them.

This is what we call a hard learning experience.

 

[eosos]

So could you technically have a maverick good guy ISP pop up that has the selling point of not doing any of this shit, even though the law would allow it to? Wouldn't everyone just flock to that ISP then?

In a ton of towns/cities/areas some ISPs made deals with the local government to be the only guys in town. So in cases like these you're sorta fucked.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Netflix, Amazon, Google, and Facebook NEED to throw unbelievable amounts of money to fight this. This is their livelihoods at stake.

I really don't think there is anything that can be do the stop it, asides for changing the mind of the right wing FCC members. I believe they are appointed, and I don't know of the president can ask them to resign, if Agent Orange would even want it.

 

[PSqueak]

never forget:

Ahahaha, i always remember some dumbfuck said this, i had completely forgotten it had been Ted Cruz.

 

[RinsFury]

Leave us the fuck alone already.