OT: net neutrality vote today.
December 14th, 2017 at 7:45 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 8:50 AM ^
I mean, it could work the other way too where websites or even the customer say fuck you and go with ATT over comcast or choose somebody like WOW who gives better deals than everybody else, forcing other ISPs to lower their prices. if there is enough competition Supply = Demand, but i think most of us are scared with how high our demand is for the internet as well as the fact that there is so little competition for ISPs.
December 14th, 2017 at 5:36 PM ^
So when do we get this "competition" that people keep talking about?
December 14th, 2017 at 7:49 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 7:58 AM ^
That's pretty much the key to life: laugh about it. I'm old. Take it from me, I've seen a lot.
The bottom line:
The man knows what you are doing. You are on this site for free.
He's challenged because you left TV and newspapers, because he was making money off of you watching TV and reading newspapers.
The man must make money. The man is smart, and he will find a way.
The man will be paid.
It's just a question of how, when and how much.
The from whom?
Everyone.
December 14th, 2017 at 7:51 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 7:58 AM ^
and the FCC chief's last position was as Chief Legal Counsel for Verizon.
Nothing more you really need to know.
Full-on banana republic.
December 14th, 2017 at 8:06 AM ^
Fairness isn’t guaranteed. If you want faster internet budget more money personally to it. Don’t regulate it to punish everyone. This world is such a bunch of sky is falling bitch boys these days
December 14th, 2017 at 8:13 AM ^
The Internet was/is quite literally government funded and invented. You're entire argument is void. Government money funded the whole thing from the basic protocols to the basic technologies right down to HTTP. All government bankrolled. Christ, the internet was literally designed to be a nuclear safe communications network in the event of WWIII. If it wasn't for the government, the Internet literally wouldn't exist.
December 14th, 2017 at 8:17 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 8:26 AM ^
Joke all you want, but the Internet WAS a government invention, payed for with government money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET
That was the beginning of the Internet. And then the government further funded its expansion via NSFNet/CSNET/etc. Hell, Michigan has a prominent place in Internet history via MERIT and their oversight of the network backbone for almost a decade.
December 14th, 2017 at 8:32 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 9:06 AM ^
and spent millions in lobbying just to get the legal right to suppress content?
Yeah.
December 14th, 2017 at 9:23 AM ^
Your post is complete bullshit, so it doesn't matter where it points.
December 14th, 2017 at 11:19 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 11:41 AM ^
This has literally nothing to do with net neutrality, but please continue to show your ignorance.
December 14th, 2017 at 3:12 PM ^
illinformed, false articles I've ever read.
You obviously know nothing about the history of the iphone, and how/why the deal with At&T was reached.
December 14th, 2017 at 4:04 PM ^
December 29th, 2017 at 9:45 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 3:25 PM ^
Apple is not a telecommunication service and is not regulated under title II of the Communication Act. Whether or not they should be able to dictate which carriers suport their devices is open to debate, but it certainly has nothing to do with net neutrality.
Cherry picking revolutionary devices that made it big despite lack of NN rules being in place is stupid because that device only exists because of good regulation. If it weren't for NN principles, the internet might not exist as it is today as telecos would have faught against hooking modems to phone lines just like they did carterfone, hush-a-phone, and eventually answering machines and fax machines.
Go suck an egg and take your stupid articles with you.
December 14th, 2017 at 11:55 AM ^
No they wouldn't. It would be perfectly allowed under NN to only support 1 network. You really don't seem to grasp what you are talking about.
December 14th, 2017 at 2:49 PM ^
Your post and argument are so incoherent I can't figure out what you're trying to say. If NN laws were in place apple would not have been able to engage in what you think is anticompetetive behavior, but NN wasn't the law of the land so therefor regulations are bad because they weren't in place?
December 14th, 2017 at 11:36 AM ^
All they did was buy big Internet ports in major cities (DTW, Flint, etc.) where access was cheap and then backhaul access to cities around Michigan via frame relay. For a while they politically blackmailed universities in Michigan into buying their service. UM was one of the first to go around them by buying dark fiber from A2 to the NAP in Chicago.
They didn't develop technology. They were just a tier two ISP whose ole died when fiber MAN's expanded.
December 14th, 2017 at 12:07 PM ^
Eh? You might want to look into the actual history of MERIT. It was a joint NGO founded by UM, MSU, and WSU. And they literally developed and ran the NSFNet. MERIT was literally a contemporary of ARPANET.
They may of become a joke, but they certainly didn't start as one.
December 14th, 2017 at 6:28 PM ^
and all they did was to piece together a frame relay backbone (first T1 and later DS3)Internet in MI using leased lines providing access to severely oversubscribed ports.
They did not develop any technology whatsoever (and neither did NSF Net). Merit was just an early ISP. The proliferation of fiber wiped them, and all others like them, out.
December 14th, 2017 at 8:30 AM ^
The free market IS what created the internet as we know it today. Not the pentagon and their nuclear safe communication network.
December 14th, 2017 at 4:24 PM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 11:47 PM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 11:48 PM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 11:50 PM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 11:52 PM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 11:53 PM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 8:33 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 9:36 AM ^
The Government wanted to protect "information" just in case they blew up the whole world playing their MADenning "pew pew" games, so they took our forebears' money, Tesla's notebook and built the infrastructure.
And now, after they shockingly didn't get us all killed, instead of giving back the internet to the people who funded it and spent many hours in fallout shelters (internet woulda been great there eh?), the Government hands off charging us to the people who have proven to be the greatest extractors of profit while providing the least useful and least quaility content....cable companies!
I wonder what most people will choose?
Pay a hacker a $1 for unlimited content......or pay for cable?
December 14th, 2017 at 8:14 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 8:32 AM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 9:29 AM ^
The current issue comes down to pay lanes for IP prioritization and access. Companies like Verizon and ATT (who bought their way into the Internet and didn't develop it btw) see companies like Google and Netflix making money on the backbone and want to set up private toll booths.
There is a reason the US is behind other developed countries in terms of ISP speeds and it is precisely because the industry has morphed into an oligopoly without regulation. The FCC will eventually have to unbundled the last mile like they did for UNPI for voice fifteen years ago. The ILEC's still own most of the last mile in the US and it inhibits both wireless and wireline competition. NN just guarantees the oligopolists can't control the backbone, too, which is their desire.
BTW, Verizon makes about $12B in profits anually.
December 14th, 2017 at 11:30 AM ^
Well now you know where to invest
December 14th, 2017 at 1:28 PM ^
The transformation of the industry into an oligopoly has been aided by lots of state laws passed at the behest of the telecom industry that prevent local governments from creating local ISPs. In places where this hasn't been prevented, there are several success stories where cities have provided better service at lower prices than big telecom. The industry has spent a huge amount of money trying to prevent these services legislatively, rather than compete with them on price/service. Makes it hard to take seriously the claims that "the market will sort this out."
December 14th, 2017 at 10:02 AM ^
Especially your quote on what the world is filled with. Get with the trends of what makes things better for all people. Lot of people had your "bitch boy" mentality in regards to the Civil Rights Movement, don't be ignorant and be on the wrong side of history.
December 14th, 2017 at 12:09 PM ^
Wow that is a stretch!
But look, I thought his comment actually had merit until he threw in the "bitch boy" line. It was uncalled for.
December 14th, 2017 at 2:30 PM ^
December 14th, 2017 at 3:46 PM ^
It's a lot more then just Internet speed. Its the fact that major corporations would be controlling the information we would be able to see. If they are slowing down sites where you get a large portion of your information and then direct you towards an area where you normally do not that would be control over your information. It's a slippery slope.
In regards to Civil Rights Movement, that was fighting for a group of minorities to have equal rights. It does not have to come down to skin color for people to want to fight for equal rights. There have been numerous uprisings throughout histroy of "douches whining" about tyrants and fighting representation.
December 14th, 2017 at 5:48 PM ^
You are doing a fantastic job of broadcasting your ignorance for the whole blog to see. Good job. 10/10, wouldn't read again.
December 14th, 2017 at 5:48 PM ^
You are doing a fantastic job of broadcasting your ignorance for the whole blog to see. Good job. 10/10, wouldn't read again.
December 14th, 2017 at 1:35 PM ^
Kettle, meet Badfish02.
December 14th, 2017 at 8:15 AM ^
you put a stamp on it and the Postal Service delivers it to the sender. Today, the internet works in much the same way.
Removing NN would allow the Postal Service (ISP's) to take your stamped letter, that you already paid for, and demand that the person you're sending it to pay for it again.
Telcoms want to double dip and get paid on both ends. Because charging 2x-5x what other countries do for internet service that is probably 1/10th as fast, just isn't good enough for Verizon's shareholders.
This whole thing is just disgusting.
The new "normal".
December 14th, 2017 at 9:56 AM ^
The Post Office has different classes of mail (bulk/first/overnight, etc) with different rates and speeds. I've seen the argument that repealing NN would allow ISPs to have similar tiered cost/speed options. I tend to oppose government intervention in anything, but I appreciate the ruling body utility in matters of safety and commerce, etc. I'm not pro or con here... Why is the tiered traffic case different than the Post Office case?
Thanks.
December 14th, 2017 at 10:17 AM ^
We already have a tiered internet service. You pay the ISP for how much speed you want, and in some places how much data.
But only one party is paying. If I'm sending you a package, I pay the shipping fees and you pay nothing.
Under the new rules I'll pay to send you the package, and you'll pay to receive it.