-
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 Republicans vow to gut net neutrality rules as soon as possible
- Thread starter giga
- Start date
- Status
Ploid 3.0
Member
Maybe this could turn out to be a good thing?
White people ain't too bothered at the idea of mass deportations or internment camps. But having to pay an extra fee to watch the latest season of Game of Thrones? There'll definitely be hell to pay!
White people ain't too bothered at the idea of mass deportations or internment camps. But having to pay an extra fee to watch the latest season of Game of Thrones? There'll definitely be hell to pay!
Zantetsuken
Member
This sounds very dangerous the more I think about it.
He does want to put 100's of satellites in leo, low enough for good ping, speed, and coverage. He'd need access to space and AI might help with managing key efficiency targets.
Ploid 3.0
Member
This is last GoT season, and it'll be done before any change happens. The majority of people care about a ton of great and important issues, it's just the smaller group, which were willing to look over certain things. Some of those are even happy to support those certain things (woman president? I'll rather have Drumpf!), sadly they had the majority of the electoral college votes. Who knows, maybe the people in the rural areas won't be affected by the internet thing.
Ok Elon, it's all up to you buddy. Please don't create a evil AI, heck maybe we need a strict AI to save us from ourselves. Just don't send aliens to Manhattan and blow it up just to unite us against a common enemy.
yep
CitizenCope
Member
Been browsing GAF at work, hours a day for 10 years. How will this effect that? It's all I care to know at the moment.
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
Fuck you assholes.
I'm guessing posting on forums and Facebook don't really strain your ISP's bandwidth, so no effect at all (at least at first)
YouTube? Netflix? and STEAM/PSN/XBL?
That's a different story... expect to pay added premiums on top of the subscriptions you already pay for said services.
Done.
Ploid 3.0
Member
I'm aware of that, I was just using it as an example, dang it.
Yeah I know, I was smiling as I typed that. It's so saaaad!
This isn't really relevant... but no it isn't. There are like 7 episodes this season and then another season in 2018.
Nydius
Gold Member
I've been posting in a similar topic over in the Gaming forums but this is probably the better place to discuss as my posts are generally not gaming-related.
I've been seeing a lot of discussion on this across various forums where people supporting it are making the whole deregulation promotes the free market and competition argument to justify gutting net neutrality.
I don't know why there's this idea that deregulation will lead to more competition in this space. I'm old enough to remember a time when cable was still new and expanding and there wasn't a lot of regulation to be had. I very much remember when Cox Communications came through my area buying up all the smaller local Cablevision companies, putting them under the Cox Communications tent (and then jacking up cable rates literally overnight). At that point, the only cable provider was then Cox Communications or you had to get a big satellite dish (this was well before DirectTV or Dish came onto the scene). There were minimal regulations for the industry at the time.
Cox Communications then owned the entire SE Virginia area and Adelphia (now Comcast) owned the entire Richmond, VA market with zero overlap. People caught in the more rural middle were stuck with limited services while the two companies bickered over territory and colluded to maintain their respective fiefdoms.
What in the history of deregulating companies should give me the belief that it will end well for the consumer? Because it never has. Even if there's full deregulation of the cable industry consider that they'll just find ways to collude and restrict competition by exploiting infrastructure ownership and/or agreements, the same way telecom companies keep out smaller regional telco players today.
I've been seeing a lot of discussion on this across various forums where people supporting it are making the whole deregulation promotes the free market and competition argument to justify gutting net neutrality.
I don't know why there's this idea that deregulation will lead to more competition in this space. I'm old enough to remember a time when cable was still new and expanding and there wasn't a lot of regulation to be had. I very much remember when Cox Communications came through my area buying up all the smaller local Cablevision companies, putting them under the Cox Communications tent (and then jacking up cable rates literally overnight). At that point, the only cable provider was then Cox Communications or you had to get a big satellite dish (this was well before DirectTV or Dish came onto the scene). There were minimal regulations for the industry at the time.
Cox Communications then owned the entire SE Virginia area and Adelphia (now Comcast) owned the entire Richmond, VA market with zero overlap. People caught in the more rural middle were stuck with limited services while the two companies bickered over territory and colluded to maintain their respective fiefdoms.
What in the history of deregulating companies should give me the belief that it will end well for the consumer? Because it never has. Even if there's full deregulation of the cable industry consider that they'll just find ways to collude and restrict competition by exploiting infrastructure ownership and/or agreements, the same way telecom companies keep out smaller regional telco players today.
Ploid 3.0
Member
Oh, I thought it was just the half season left. Well, those beautiful CG fights in the last few episodes in 2018 will be buffering along on non premium internet lane HBOGO customers. Wait, is the 2018 season full or is that going to be 7 also? The last half of this upcoming season? It's own season? I'll have to google it.
Edit: Season 7 and 8, short seasons. Those better be some amazing episodes. 8 is probably going to be nuts with CG.
What can this realistically do? The people that want to get rid of it control the government. Pay lawyers that no one will listen to?
spiderman123
Member
Bring it you FCC republicans, the internet is more powerful than your feeble minds can comprehend.
Big Baybee
Member
*shrug* People have to learn the hard way I guess.
And that's a whole load of bullshit. Republicans are great at taking something evil they want to do and sell it as though it's benefiting the consumer.
archreaper93
Member
So, from what I'm gathering in this thread, net neutrality basically means you can't charge people based on what they use their Internet for, correct?
I can't see how anyone (aside from providers, of course) would be against that.
Is there anything else to it, or is that it?
I can't see how anyone (aside from providers, of course) would be against that.
Is there anything else to it, or is that it?
InsaneTiger
Member
America is owned by the corporations, the people are it's slaves.
Hahaha bloody hell, the sad part of all this is you are correct.
Blue Ninja
Member
Pretty much. Everyone who didn't vote, or who voted Trump: this shit is on you.
I just hope the ISP's here don't follow suit.
AlphaDragoon
Member
Sad thing is, it isn't even "what we wanted". The majority of "us" voted for Hillary and got fucked over by the EC.
SpaceCadetKeon
Banned
Trump's approval ratings will tank even further if this goes through.
And he'll tell his followers his approval ratings are TREMENDOUS.
Electoral College is why we can't have nice things.
computers putin'
Member
This is probably what's gonna happen, and most people won't be able to see through it
It was close enough that it doesn't matter. Near half wanted exactly this, and the other half didn't or didn't give a shit.
California didn't want this
MidgarBlowedUp
Member
I'll just download the internet before this happens, then install some chat bots to talk to.
Damn Democrats think the job of a regulatory agency is to regulate critical infrastructure. Everyone knows their job is to do whatever gives the huge corporations controlling regional monopolies more power. Free market, dummies! If you're getting a bad deal, just move across the country or get dial up!
Or put on your bootstraps and make your own internet provider like a real American!
Ploid 3.0
Member
Trickle Down Economics Laughing.jpg
7DollarHagane
Banned
If the Republicans actually wanted to follow their claimed political agenda on this they would both end net neutrality and open up the isp market to competition. If there was actual competition in the market and not just 3 giant providers that make the rules, net neutrality might not even be necessary.
Unfortunately we know that's not the case and we will be seeing $10/month unlimited youtube plans and netflix/hulu/etc access on our Internet bills before too long.
Can't wait to be limited to 50gb of downloads from psn or steam for the month unless you pay a $20/month access fee.
Unfortunately we know that's not the case and we will be seeing $10/month unlimited youtube plans and netflix/hulu/etc access on our Internet bills before too long.
Can't wait to be limited to 50gb of downloads from psn or steam for the month unless you pay a $20/month access fee.
Ploid 3.0
Member
I wonder if google will allow us to really order The Youtube Collection
exmachina64
Banned
In case you're being genuine, net neutrality is the concept that all internet traffics should be treated equally or neutrally. Such an attitude whether adopted through government regulation or industry self-regulation would mean that ISPs would not be able to discriminate between various types of traffic or to promote one service over another.
In practice, ISPs want neither net neutrality nor to be classified as public utility in order to promote their own services for things such as social media sites, video streaming services and much more. ISPs market this as "companies like Netflix should pay their fair share to use our infrastructure," however, Netflix already pays for its internet usage through companies such as Level-3 or its own infrastructure it has deployed.
Rather than having a "free lunch," companies already pay for the services they use. ISPs want to essentially triple-bill. They bill you, the consumer, for general internet access, then they want to charge an extra bill to services like Netflix; Facebook; Steam; etc., and finally, they want to charge you extra for using these services -- provided the companies aren't paying them extra to avoid doing so.
You can see an example of this in the mobile space, where certain services don't count toward your data usage. Future examples could be Comcast steering you toward its streaming service or AT&T steering you toward DirectTV Now.
The ultimate effect of a non-neutral internet is to discourage innovation because smaller companies can't compete with the added cost created by ISPs.
Edit: Political reasons for being against net neutrality are vague because it's driven primarily by industry lobbying. It can range from a general aversion to regulation, the aforementioned "free lunch" argument, and the bizarre idea that pricing smaller companies out of competition can actually increase competition and innovation.
MidgarBlowedUp
Member
How would this even work though. I'm not paying money to use a certain website, especially not face book or YouTube. I see something like this backfiring terribly.
Despite the stuff in this thread talking about add-one like websites are cable channels the far more likely scenario is the ISPs strong arm the companies providing you content rather than you yourself, though those costs might be passed on to you in some way.
The most recent relevant example was ISPs telling Netflix they use up a large amount of bad width and should have to pay them money, the ISPs then throttled Netflix and customers got angry with Netflix so Netflix started paying the ISP and they speeds returned to normal.
The implications here are massive, think of horse armor in oblivion vs what we now consider micro transactions. ISPs would be able to control the Internet and crush or boost new and existing services, would Netflix have ever taken off if AT&T decided to cripple all video streaming services that don't pay them? Other massive corporations could influence things too, maybe Warner brothers gets an exclusive contract for priority lanes and all other video content is depripritized, and of course the dooms day scenario of ISPs offering users add ons is also a possible outcome.
I'm missing stuff and this is by no means definitive but I think the danger is clear.
It's another example of what hypocrites Republicans are when it comes to freedom and laissez-faire economics.
A neutral internet is basically a perfect digital free market that facilitates competition, lower prices and innovation. But of course Republicans only like free markets when it allows them to build monopolies, pool wealth, and then they put the fences up.
Cunts.
A neutral internet is basically a perfect digital free market that facilitates competition, lower prices and innovation. But of course Republicans only like free markets when it allows them to build monopolies, pool wealth, and then they put the fences up.
Cunts.
In the future, Americans will make all their purchases at Amazon. Jeff Bezos will pay ISPs billions a year for premium access, all other webshops will be crippled. Amazon will raise their prices to afford this and there is nothing you guys can do, because it's completely legal.
Most people will likely have no incomes to pay for this as Amazon Go-like models are triple downed on.
Trump's labor pick believes we should automate everything. He's correct, but in a jobs cult, all that benefit are those that own the machines, not the people in which the machines displace.
CadetMahoney
Member
So people who use fightcade/GGPO in America will throttled unless they pay some fee.
It opens up ISPs to throttle certain services and cripple competition. Let's say someone launches a competitor for Netflix; better videoquality, bigger library, etc. Currently, Netflix can compete with them by either driving the price of their service down or extending their library or improving their videobitrate. With net neutrality gone, they get an extra tool; they can convince / pay off ISPs to throttle the competition, so if you watch Netflix, you get the smooth and continuous playback you want, and the competitor would have low videoquality, constant buffering, etc etc.
And the reverse is also an option; my ISP has it's own VOD-service and they could throttle Netflix down to unusable levels.
They could start slowly throttling speeds down over time and then pop up out of nowhere and go
"oh? Youre internet seems slow when accessing netflix? Well. We have JUST THE THING FOR YOU! pay and extra fiver a month to get lightning fast speeds.. EVEN WHILE WATCHING NETFLIX!!!"
Best case scenario is, like cellphone plans, we have access to our current grandfather plans to maintain what we already have.
Man... Wow.
"oh? Youre internet seems slow when accessing netflix? Well. We have JUST THE THING FOR YOU! pay and extra fiver a month to get lightning fast speeds.. EVEN WHILE WATCHING NETFLIX!!!"
Best case scenario is, like cellphone plans, we have access to our current grandfather plans to maintain what we already have.
Man... Wow.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked