• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

FCC overrules state laws to help two cities build out their fiber networks

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chaplain

Member
Can I get some opinions on the follow comment by Mark Cuban. He is predicting that the proposed FCC Internet regulations will end up impacting TV:

Cuban began by predicting “the courts will rule the Internet for the next however many years.” He then explained, “let’s just take it all the way through its logical conclusion. All bits are bits, all bits are equal. If all bits are equal, then let’s look at what a stream bit is an example. So when Henry and I do an interview, and it’s streamed lived on the Internet, there’s a camera, it goes through an encoder, it sends it out via server or some manner to the Internet, you click on Business Insider and you watch the stream, right? Now, let’s look at CNBC on Comcast. There’s cameras right in front of you, they go through a switcher, they go through an encoder, it’s put through a server, it goes to Comcast, and it’s streamed in a managed service environment to television. It’s the exact same thing. And if it’s the exact same thing technologically and all bits are equal, then why shouldn’t CNBC and all TV networks that are delivered on cable, and Telco, and fiber like Verizon, why shouldn’t they be part of the open Internet as well? And if they are and all bits are equal, now, let’s take it one step further. It’s the purview of the FCC now. The FCC, right? So, the FCC now has to apply their same standards to content, don’t they, that they do to television content because that’s where it is and there’s going to be certain citizens who think ‘well now, since all content is delivered over the Internet because all bits are bits, and it’s a fair, and open, and equal Internet — decency standards.’ And remember the FCC is the same agency that fought Nipplegate for eight years over a wardrobe malfunction.”

link
 

SimleuqiR

Member
Can I get some opinions on the follow comment by Mark Cuban. He is predicting that the proposed FCC Internet regulations will end up impacting TV:

NIppplegate happened because it happened during a "nationally broadcasted" show.

If the Superbowl & it's half-time would have only been available via a internet stream, then there wouldn't have been a Nipplegate.

There is a difference between broadcast TV, Cable TV, and Netflix.
 

acksman

Member
I'd love a local municipal fiber system.

This so much this. If one large city could get a boilerplate of how to do it and share it would be incredible to see it take off. I could imagine being able to qualify for low/free cost through the city based on taxes/income.
 

BitStyle

Unconfirmed Member
Let's go, FCC! Kind of funny after all those dreadful commercials spreading FUD about the government ruining the internet.
VYhh3EM.jpg
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
You're right, but it's because they're became an ISP themselves that some people thought they wouldn't be.

reports goes that the CEO has been trying to deter Obama from Net Neutrality.

I don't think they are wholly against, but they did warn about some of the points. Or at least wanted certain changes made.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...heeler-net-neutrality-plan-google-115502.html

Nice. Now if we could knock this down nationwide we'd be in business to have Google/Cities just sweep through areas and get the "broadband" (lol) companies off their asses to attempt to catch up.

If Google can partner with cities now, it would be a slam dunk in a ton of places.
 

slit

Member
Good, I'm sick and tired of hearing about states rights whenever regulation is brought up.

I don't give a flip about states rights.
 

C.Dark.DN

Banned
Chatt's fiber internet is fucking amazing. 100/100 no cap for $58. 1000/1000 is $70. There's TV and phone service as well.

This is the kind of thing you guys want in your cities.
 

DietRob

i've been begging for over 5 years.
Someone please come save me from Ma' Bell. She's been promising to run fiber to my neighborhood for over 5 years now.
 

Vyrance

Member
Fuck yea. Very good decision. Hoping more municipalities start to do the same now that they see the FCC allowing other cities to do it.
 
Can I get some opinions on the follow comment by Mark Cuban. He is predicting that the proposed FCC Internet regulations will end up impacting TV:

This is a really bad slippery slope argument.

The government regulates electricity, electricity powers the TV and DVD player, DVD players can watch indecent material the government. Say no to government regulation of electricity.
 

Hatty

Member
Somebody save me from suddenlink
I pay for 50 megabits but usually only get 5. There is also a cap which is pretty awful when you have five adults in the house using the internet
 

Sciz

Member
Chatt's fiber internet is fucking amazing. 100/100 no cap for $58. 1000/1000 is $70. There's TV and phone service as well.

This is the kind of thing you guys want in your cities.

It'd take me less than half the time to drive over to Chattanooga, download a 50 GB game, and drive back than it would to download it on my current internet here in Memphis. Absolutely maddening.
 
FCC trying to take credit for something they were supposed to do....



WHAT YOU WANT A COOKIE?
Its not easy to get this done. Getting this done required legal counsel, listening to experts, and fighting a powerful lobbying force.

Enforcing net neutrality actually isn't something they are supposed to do. Its something they should do.
 
Chatt's fiber internet is fucking amazing. 100/100 no cap for $58. 1000/1000 is $70. There's TV and phone service as well.

This is the kind of thing you guys want in your cities.
My Comcast bill is now 96 dollars a month for 20mbs (actual speed) and about 25 TV channels. Its awful.
 
Can I get some opinions on the follow comment by Mark Cuban. He is predicting that the proposed FCC Internet regulations will end up impacting TV:

If broadcasters are using the internet to transfer data and not an intranet or a leased line, then yes they should play by the same rules. The better question would be why would a broadcaster use the internet to transfer internal data to local machines?
 

stonesak

Okay, if you really insist
So, basically we give control over internet access to either ISP's or the government. Talk about choosing between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich.
 

DBT85

Member
Idontbelieveyou.gif

Ajit Pai told me Europe has slower speeds and higher prices due to regulation.

Its bad here. My brother and dad have to put up with 152mb for like £40 a month.

I could only download games from steam at 17MB a second ffs.
 
Chatt's fiber internet is fucking amazing. 100/100 no cap for $58. 1000/1000 is $70. There's TV and phone service as well.

This is the kind of thing you guys want in your cities.

That sounds incredible. Right now I get 60Mbps for download, which has been fine for my purposes (though faster is always better). My issue is with my 4Mbps upload. I can't stream multiplayer games without lag or at 1080p. I am with Charter (who I have had great experiences with) and pay $55 a month for it. No cap.
 

ISOM

Member
Pretty damn sad that the FCC actually allowing competition is seen as a major victory for consumers.

How is it not a major victory? Considering how much control companies have over politicians, this decision shows that the people can still win.
 

kess

Member
Can I get some opinions on the follow comment by Mark Cuban. He is predicting that the proposed FCC Internet regulations will end up impacting TV:

Honestly, I would have been shocked if the Bush Administration (and by extension, Michael Powell) looked the other way during the 2004 halftime furore, which was seen as a slap in the face to millions of Americans. Morality in Media and all those myriad family associations don't support Republicans for nothing.

If guns and abortion mobilize effective activist bases, free internet can become as potent a wedge issue.
 

ISOM

Member
So, basically we give control over internet access to either ISP's or the government. Talk about choosing between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich.

You absolutely have not read anything regarding what net neutrality actually is, which is typical of those on the right wing.
 

C.Dark.DN

Banned
I hope things turn around for you guys. :(
Maybe I missed it, but what were those state laws, specifically, and how did they prevent fiber implementation?
Probably a bunch of BS. In 2008 Comcast lost a lawsuit filed against our electric power company saying they had an unfair advantage and were breaking laws by borrowing money from the electric side to fund the venture. (By the way I think it cost 220 million.) They lost that battle and obviously wanted to limit coverage expansion because they're fucked if they don't.
 
How is it not a major victory? Considering how much control companies have over politicians, this decision shows that the people can still win.

I think he's saying that it's sad that this is something we even needed to fight for. That is should have been a given and that, while it's great that things worked out in a pro-consumer fashion, the fact that it was such a hard won victory is concerning.
 

hitsugi

Member
Chatt's fiber internet is fucking amazing. 100/100 no cap for $58. 1000/1000 is $70. There's TV and phone service as well.

This is the kind of thing you guys want in your cities.

Whenever I read things like this it just sounds like fantasy.. living in California, at least.
 

dabig2

Member
So, basically we give control over internet access to either ISP's or the government. Talk about choosing between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich.

Yeah no. There's no giving of anything here since "we" the people have never controlled a thing. ISPs have controlled the internet for decades and were set to control it even more (see tiered pricing, Netflix throttling, city municipial fiber bans, mega corporate mergers, billion+ dollar Congressional lobbying, even more lobbyists getting political positions of power, etc.).

Net neutrality is the government stepping in and limiting the ways ISPs can fuck us over. There is no control of internet access here that is being taken away from the consumer to give to the government. Hell, the opposite.
 

Averon

Member
I think he's saying that it's sad that this is something we even needed to fight for. That is should have been a given and that, while it's great that things worked out in a pro-consumer fashion, the fact that it was such a hard won victory is concerning.

Yeah, this is what I was getting at. The fact that we had to fight tooth and nail to get even any semblance of competition is terrible. Shows how much control these corporations have over us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom