Support NeoGAF

[TyrantII]

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?

Where is this Maverick with 500 billion in capital to build out a communications network and keep the FCC placated from bootstomping them for being the new guy.

Google is pretty much the only one to try, and they're scaling back because of the costs to do so as a publicly traded Corp.

There a reason monopolistic restrictions are relaxed on those providing infrastructure and why taxpayers subsidize it. It would never get built due to risk and costs otherwise.

 

[Corronchilejano]

The more heavily you regulate something, the less of it you're likely to get

I'm glad giving providers the ability to cut off certain parts of the internet or charge me more to access them will result in me having more internet than before.

 

[linkboy]

I'm glad giving providers the ability to cut off certain parts of the internet or charge me more to access them will result in me having more internet than before.

But Ajit Pai doesn't give two shits about you having more internet. All he cares about is lining the pockets of his corporate masters with more of your money.

 

[Lord Frieza]

I guess I'll go ahead and start donating to EFF. I don't know how much they can do, because I have no idea what legal of legality precedent there is, but I guess that's all there is to do right now. I'm pushing like a $150 in donations a month anymore. Lol, man, I am going to kill myself in like two years times tops.

 

[Rollo Tomasi]

The NeoGAF package is going to be expensive. We shared too many Bernie and Hillary links.

Not if you got NeoGAF Gold.

 

[Shredderi]

Where is this Maverick with 500 billion in capital to build out a communications network and keep the FCC placated from bootstomping them for being the new guy.

Google is pretty much the only one to try, and they're scaling back because of the costs to do so as a publicly traded Corp.

There a reason monopolistic restrictions are relaxed on those providing infrastructure and why taxpayers subsidize it. It would never get built due to risk and costs otherwise.

That's why I said "technically". Like, if one boundlessly rich guy wanted to be the saviour and setup a haven ISP, there's nothing that could force them to enforce shit politics?

 

[TalonJH]

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.

We kind of already do.

Even though the Internet was invented in the United States, Americans pay the most in the world for broadband access. And it's not exactly blazing fast.

For an Internet connection of 25 megabits per second, New Yorkers pay about $55 — nearly double that of what residents in London, Seoul, and Bucharest, Romania, pay. And residents in cities such as Hong Kong, Seoul, Tokyo and Paris get connections nearly eight times faster.

Source: PBS
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/internet-u-s-compare-globally-hint-slower-expensive/

This will make it even worse.

 

[RCSI]

Quoting from a list a member at Arstechnica posted, but here are active ways you may contribute to protect NN:

if you want to help protect NN you should support groups like ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Free Press who are fighting to keep Net Neutrality.

https://www.aclu.org/

https://www.eff.org/

https://www.freepress.net/

https://www.fightforthefuture.org/

https://www.publicknowledge.org/

https://demandprogress.org/

also you can set them as your charity on https://www.amazon.com/?tag=neogaf0e-20

also write to your House Representative and senators http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_ ... erBy=state

and the FCC

https://www.fcc.gov/about/contact

you can also use this that help you contact your house and congressional reps, its easy to use and cuts down on the transaction costs with writing a letter to your reps.

https://resistbot.io/

Enough defeatism attitude, take action. This goes for all other policies to help the nation (health care, environment, etc.)

 

[avaya]

I'm glad giving providers the ability to cut off certain parts of the internet or charge me more to access them will result in me having more internet than before.

What is funny is the that you have real-world examples from both across all of the EU/EEA + Japan that show this to be categorically false when it comes to telecoms.

 

[PeakPointMatrix]

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.

Christ you can almost hear the executives creaming themselves.

 

[Lord Frieza]

Quoting from a list a member at Arstechnica posted, but here are active ways you may contribute to protect NN:



Enough defeatism attitude, take action. This goes for all other policies to help the nation (health care, environment, etc.)

Optimism isn't in the core package, you have to pay $10 extra.

But seriously, thanks for the list. Didn't know the ACLU dealt in these kinds of matters, I already support them. I guess I'll donate to the EFF as well.

 

[jfoul]

Great, now we have to worry about this shit again.

 

[Tahnit]

You would think redneck uneducated trump
Supporters would be against this as this is the only thing that has meaning in their sad little lives.

 

[TalonJH]

You would think redneck uneducated trump
Supporters would be against this as this is the only thing that has meaning in their sad little lives.

They look at it as a smaller government issue. They believe that in capitalism if the government gets out of the way of businesses, everyone will profit from it and everything will balance itself out for the better...by itself.

 

[Zolo]

They look at it as a smaller government issue. They believe that in capitalism if the government gets out of the way of businesses, everyone will profit from it and everything will balance itself out for the better...by itself.

Unfortunately, this is true, and the majority of people lack the knowledge to know the details of what's actually better, so they just go with what sounds better to them.

 

[HelloNewman]

I can't wait to pay for my moviebuff internet package for unlimited streaming on Netflix/hulu.

Or my media package for unlimited access to Youtube/vimeo!

Socialbutterfly deal for unlimted Facebook/twitter use for just 29.99 a month.

Or triple-play social/media/streaming package for just $90 a month, woo!

Don't forget that will be on top of your current bill : )

 

[Zolo]

I can't wait to pay for my moviebuff internet package for unlimited streaming on Netflix/hulu.

Or my media package for unlimited access to Youtube/vimeo!

Socialbutterfly deal for unlimted Facebook/twitter use for just 29.99 a month.

Or triple-play social/media/streaming package for just $90 a month, woo!

How would this even work with random sites you go to through google and such?

 

[linkboy]

How would this even work with random sites you go to through google and such?

The same way it works on your TV. Try going to HBO through your cable/sat provider and see what happens.

If you browse to a sports site without having the sports subscription, it'll put a page up that lets you know that you can't access this site until you pay for said subscription (and have a huge button to let you know how to subscribe).

 

[Zolo]

The same way it works on your TV. Try going to HBO through your cable/sat provider and see what happens.

If you browse to a sports site without having the sports subscription, it'll put a page up that lets you know that you can't access this site until you pay for said subscription (and have a huge button to let you know how to subscribe).

True, but there's a limited amount of channels and literally a countless amount of sites on the internet.

 

[boiled goose]

How can we fight this

 

[Morts]

Fucking do it already. We know it's coming, and I've been waiting months to say "I told you so" to a few people.

 

[Not]

How can we fight this

In America? By giving your money to corporations that will lose rather than gain money due to it.

 

[PandaPandaPanda]

True, but there's a limited amount of channels and literally a countless amount of sites on the internet.

breitbart, fox news, and info wars not behind a paywall

everything else is behind a paywall at different levels

 

[nintendoman58]

All right. Here we go. Now's the time for action people. This fight will be difficult, but not impossible.

Make sure to make your voice heard.

Don't say anything like "comments are meaningless". A statement needs to be made.

This won't be as easy to undo as the privacy rules. This is something that takes time, and during that time we need to be as loud and vocal about this as possible.

That way, when the time comes for them to make a decision, if they still go against our desires, then that decision will forever be known as the one that deliberately ignored the voices of millions Americans, and cause a backlash unlike any other.

Comment, donate, and speak up.

Do NOT give up.

Quoting from a list a member at Arstechnica posted, but here are active ways you may contribute to protect NN:



Enough defeatism attitude, take action. This goes for all other policies to help the nation (health care, environment, etc.)

Excellent.

 

[The Real Abed]

I'm not worried. It'll get reversed.

I'm not worried. Trump will never win.

I'm not worried. Brexit will never pass.

 

[StrikeNinja24]

Cant say much will be lost if these two vanished.

It will for many people. Including Trump when his audience can't pay for Twitter.

 

[Swass]

Ajit Pai thinks we don't need net neutrality because ISPs can successfully govern themselves.. lol

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...tary-net-neutrality-lets-isps-call-the-shots/

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

You are 100% correct on this.. people really do not understand what net neutrality means. I saw a town hall for a Florida house republican and people brought up that they passed the bill to sell our privacy and net neutrality and he completely gave a false definition of what either of those things are and he was like "i think you are wrong on those, don't quote me i'll look it up for you later." And the audience moved on.. I think you are right that if it had a better name people would understand how important it really is.

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.

He really hasn't done a whole lot.. his claim to fame is the supreme court justice, but that was stolen and required fuckery to get done. The rest are just executive orders that will likely be held up in the courts for years. Here is a site detailing what he has accomplished.. and it really is anemic.

https://trumptracker.github.io/

 

[SugarDaddy]

I agree with the posters mentioning that Net Neutrality is a pretty shitty term for 99% of people. For example, in one of my intro CS classes, many people knew/or claimed to know what Net Neutrality was but very few could elaborate on it. And that's students that are interested in Computer Science...

 

[RedHill]

Assuming Congress doesn't pass legislation that the president certainly can sign, yes.

If they value their careers, it won't pass.

 

[Lightning_Roller]

You ain't messing with my internet, you bastards.

 

[Brandon F]

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?

Ideally yes, but there are forces at play that ensures this doesn't happen from the current larger ISP's such as Comcast. Monopolies already exist for certain areas, and laying out new pipeline infrastructure/competition will get political pushback, especially from this corrupt administration.

In the last several major cities I have lived(LA and Chicago), I have been forced into a single ISP (either Comcast or ATT). There is literally no other option at my residence, its fucking insane and in many ways completely against the concept of capitalism and free markets.

Ultimately with this administration we are going to get squeezed on everything for major corporate interests.

I agree with the posters mentioning that Net Neutrality is a pretty shitty term for 99% of people. For example, in one of my intro CS classes, many people knew/or claimed to know what Net Neutrality was but very few could elaborate on it. And that's students that are interested in Computer Science...

So true. I actually did a presentation on Net Neutrality a couple years ago(when Netflix filed a complaint with the FCC to get off their ass and stop the ISP blackmailing), like 90% of the audience had no clue what it was before I started. Most never have heard of it, and even among the few that had at least heard the term, barely any of them actually could explain it. It has gained more ground in recent years, but most of the country is oblivious.

Also most of the country will incorrectly blame Netflix for poor quality streaming when Comcast is squeezing out those hefty paytolls to send out those HD and 4K signals across the nation. It's perverse.

 

[OriginofHysteria]

I'm seriously wondering what spin they can throw to the consumer that rolling back net neutrality is a good thing. I literally can't think of anything.

 

[Brandon F]

I'm seriously wondering what spin they can throw to the consumer that rolling back net neutrality is a good thing. I literally can't think of anything.

The usual "big government getting in the way of corporate progress" bullshit.

 

[Zolo]

The usual "big government getting in the way of corporate progress" bullshit.

I wonder how this'll go when people start paying for more. Most messages get by that way because they don't actually change how someone's lived for a while. This seems like it'd be different.

 

[Moff]

I'm seriously wondering what spin they can throw to the consumer that rolling back net neutrality is a good thing. I literally can't think of anything.

I don't remember what country it was from but it was something along the line that they can offer better suited offers for individual customers, so they can pick only what they need. that was a few years ago though.

anyway, this is obviously a nightmare and it makes me upset and angry and concerned because most people don't give a shit about net neutrality

 

[Punchy4486]

I wonder how this'll go when people start paying for more. Most messages get by that way because they don't actually change how someone's lived for a while. This seems like it'd be different.

We already pay more money for worse internet than most of the world for this reason and uneducated voters still parrot it. They will still be saying it when we're paying $100 a month for 10mbps.

 

[chromatic9]

In the UK we multiple providers almost everywhere. Crazy to read places like Chicago you're forced to one provider. I also read how more and more US providers are issuing monthly caps which is increasing prices. Seems like the US is heading that way, probably the rest of the western world will follow.

I fucking hate subscription packages, this is a subscribe to subscribe abomination unfolding. I wonder if also part of it to turn you back to television.

 

[Zolo]

We already pay more money for worse internet than most of the world for this reason and uneducated voters still parrot it. They will still be saying it when we're paying $100 a month for 10mbps.

But to most in the US, that's just the norm they've had ever since paying for the internet.

 

[manzoman96]

EFF has a page set up to send your representatives a message.

 

[caffeware]

The way I see it, it's telecommunication corporations taking the power/money away from the 'big sites' corporations.

Why doesn't google, for example, become a isp to overcome this?

 

[Punchy4486]

But to most in the US, that's just the norm they've had ever since paying for the internet.

I'm guessing they won't outright ban anything without payment, just make it unbearably slow. And then when people complain they can just blame the company/site for not paying them more for better service.

Like when the cable companies and networks fight and the cable companies tell you it's the network's fault they are being dropped because they won't sign an incredibly unfair deal. Try to turn you against the victim of the blackmail for not paying up.

 

[Zolo]

I'm guessing they won't outright ban anything without payment, just make it unbearably slow. And then when people complain they can just blame the company/site for not paying them more for better service.

Like when the cable companies and networks fight and the cable companies tell you it's the network's fault they are being dropped because they won't sign an incredibly unfair deal. Try to turn you against the victim of the blackmail for not paying up.

I guess that's the most likely way. Hopefully any damage from this can be reversed if we get a Democratic majority back in office in four years.

 

[FLEABttn]

Why doesn't google, for example, become a isp to overcome this?

They did. It's a slow, expensive process where any returns aren't seen for years.

 

[Earthbound64]

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.

It really surprises me that more people don't know this.

And it's years too late to do anything about it. Obama had plenty of chances, and let it all waltz through. We're at the bottom of the avalanche now.

 

[Allforce]

Twitter/Facebook/etc could stop this by essentially holding Trump's and various other GOP member's accounts hostage by banning them. Watch how fast they reverse course.

On a serious note, how much of the country is covered by just one ISP? I've always had a choice here between AT&T, Time Warner (now Spectrum which is doing everything it can to get people to switch), and WoW. On top of various other local ISPs available.

I called WoW yesterday and told them I was considering switching to Spectrum and they dropped my bill from 75 a month to 31 for the SAME EXACT service. Desperation around these parts but the gist I get from these threads is most of the country has 1 choice for internet and that's it.

 

[AlphaDump]

How can we fight this

By not bed wetting about the wrong establishment and start going in on the republicans. This is what happens when you focus all your efforts fighting against the ones that actually defended your rights as a consumer. It is tangible now, and far too late.

I have seen you post more about barack obama getting 400k for a speech and the need to primary Democrats at every chance today, than anything else, and literally nothing on the actual shit going on in reality as a result of the GOP.

It starts with you and ends with we.

 

[jellies_two]

Small isps already prove there isn't much competition in the space. Only by dint of red tape (hangovers from rules last decade) do any small isps even exist. The resident cable company owns your area. Att, the cable part, owns some and their old copper fills in gaps.

Last time I checked Comcast was not short of profitability and capital for expansion it makes no sense to gift them free market pricing power when they have a monopoly. Saying satellite or mobile is competition is bullshit for most people.

Of course not only does the FCC want to let Comcast be free to charge whomever whatever, on both ends, they also want to reduce their corporate tax as well and then borrow the resulting gap in revenue from banks and pay them interest.

So they are going to screw you, and your offspring, all in one year.

They will gift something to Facebook and google and Netflix so they don't fight too hard on your behalf.

Money politics. Citizens united ruling is in full play here.

 

[III-V]

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 exactly what they are trying to achieve. And, really it will be farther reaching this image can portray, but yea, this is anti-consumer, anti-information bullshit.

 

[LOLCats]

im raging inside. Already wrote congresspeople and now im posting on facebook!

 

[linkboy]

True, but there's a limited amount of channels and literally a countless amount of sites on the internet.

There's already filtering software that does this. The military, for example, has software on their network that categorizes into groups and blocks websites based it's respective category (for example, NeoGAF is blocked on the computers at work).