FCC votes to repeal net neutrality rules, a milestone for Republican deregulation push

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
What pre-net neutrality horrors were there that don't exist in 2016 after net neutrality was in place?

Anyone?

With net neutrality Comcast is still a monopoly, ISP's can still throttle via a loophole, and we still see bundling.

I'd like to know too!

Someone show me the proof in the legislation to prove the sky is falling. I haven't seen it. I think the biggest group upset are those who claim "Free speech is Hate speech" to be honest.

I see YouTube throttling anything that is not sacrosanct to the PC ideology all the time. No out rage though about that! Plus how many new laws have we seen implemented with words that the average joe would think, "Sounds Good" with out even knowing what in it??? Like Obama care?

All I have seen are opinions of what it will do and I have yet to see proof of the claims from the chicken littles......

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: seeker1963

Nobody complained on your side when the FCC under Obama was trying to shut down and silence Conservative shows and websites!!!

This is what you partisan hacks don't get!!!! It's all glory days when you guys run the majority. Yet the day will come when the other side takes over????

I don't understand this at all. Net Neutrality does not favor the left or the right, it is NEUTRAL. The core principal of net neutrality is that ALL traffic is treated equal. That means that a far right wing site and a far left wing site are treated exactly the same.

Without net neutrality, the ISP's will do whatever is best for their business. This means they can block content that they view bad for business. So, let me give you a quick example.

Far right wing sites that are anti-Muslim are bad for business because it alienates a large demographic. So this means that in order to appease their Muslim customers, ISP's will block right wing sites.

Whats neutral about the government controlling the internet?

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

Rip censorship 2015-2017.

I apologize if I am not understanding you clearly here, but are you saying that Net Neutrality was censorship?

If so, would you mind explaining your meaning here?

Prior to 2015, before these regulations were imposed, we had a free and open internet," Pai told NBC News. "That is the future as well under a light touch, market-based approach. Consumers benefit, entrepreneurs benefit. Everybody in the internet economy is better off with a market based approach.

Source

The statement is from Pai. I am sick and tired of these mooks using the "free market" as a reason to screw everybody. Yeah, under the right conditions a free market is great, and does inspire competition, lower prices and/or higher quality.

Here are some of those conditions, that everybody ignores:

1) The market has to be truly free, so that anybody can enter it without massive amounts of funding.
2) The market has to be local. If you don't like Joe's buggies, you can walk down the street and buy one from Frank. If Joe builds crappy buggies, he will eventually go broke because nobody buys them.
3) Business owners have to have the quality of their product as their first priority. When markets are local, then it matters. If Joe builds crap, everybody will know it.

NONE of these conditions apply, here.

We do NOT have a free market. The technology is expensive, the infrastructure (as has been noted here before) is astronomical, and the big players own the policy makers. NOT a free market. As has also been noted, there is precious little competition in this particular market. Where I live, we have one choice of ISP provider. One, count them, one.

We do NOT have a local market. In this case, Joe builds his crappy buggies then ships them off to somewhere he's never been and does not know or give a damn about anybody there. And they don't know Joe. So why would he care if he sells them crap?

For quite some time now, the only rule big business players care about is profit. Profit first, profit last and profit always. They do not give a DAMN about anything other than what they perceive as directly impacting their profit. If they could get away with it, there would not be such a thing as a customer service department. F the customers is the primary attitude.

This is nothing more or less than the next cranking up of the heat for the frog. Hopefully the frog is getting the idea and these mooks will get run out of town on a rail, dripping feathers and tar.

The only good that might come of this move is that the GOP will be totally out of power for the next century or so. Not that the Democrats are much better... with them, you'll have a nice date. You'll still get screwed at the end of the day, but you'll get a nice dinner and a movie and have a good time while the screwing is going on.

The GOP does it Deliverance style.

Congratulations America, Trump has just allowed your ISPs to screw you over even more than you are already being screwed over.

Prepare to start paying through the nose for everything. And you already pay about 3 times as much for your internet as people in Europe do.

We’ll just have to wait until they start blocking Firearms websites...


Then we might get a bit of concern from the naysayers.

originally posted by: seeker1963
All I have seen are opinions of what it will do and I have yet to see proof of the claims from the chicken littles......

When was the last time a major corp said "Just TRUST us!" and it did not end up a major butt hurt?

originally posted by: Wardaddy454


Whats neutral about the government controlling the internet?

Please explain your opinion, how do you extrapolate the government is controlling the internet from rules that require all ISP's to treat all traffic equally? The government literally has no involvement in the running of the internet and only directs ISP's to be neutral in their treatment of traffic.

Gonna revisit this thread in a year 10 bucks says nothing has changed

a reply to: seeker1963

I've gone back and forth myself on the content provider front. Google/Twitter/Facebook indeed pick and choose what they deem permissible speech. Ordinarily, I would support that. But I have to be honest, given the scale of their reach and influence (they are essentially monopolies), I'm less supportive of an unrestricted right to exclude certain speech.

With the recent FCC ruling, now ISPs (essentially carriers) get to play the same game. That's hardly an improvement, imo.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
Gonna revisit this thread in a year...

Unless your provider scraps ATS in that time...

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
Gonna revisit this thread in a year 10 bucks says nothing has changed

You hope you'll be able to visit this thread in a year, right?

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Annee
I've been following the FCC before and including when Michael Powell was appointed chairman by "W" in 2001.

Ever heard of Clearchannel?

This total control of what media citizens are allowed to see/hear has been in the works for a long time.

Some would argue that it was already in place.

Rip censorship 2015-2017.

Agree.

This is just a formality.

This is what happened. Clearchannel is owned by right wing Christians. They, since 2001, have a monopoly of airwaves. Small local and public channels have to rent from them. Programs dealing with sex education, birth control, LGBT, etc have been cut and denied airwaves access.

This total control has been in the works for a long time.

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
What pre-net neutrality horrors were there that don't exist in 2016 after net neutrality was in place?

Anyone?

With net neutrality Comcast is still a monopoly, ISP's can still throttle via a loophole, and we still see bundling.

I'd like to know too!

Someone show me the proof in the legislation to prove the sky is falling. I haven't seen it. I think the biggest group upset are those who claim "Free speech is Hate speech" to be honest.

I see YouTube throttling anything that is not sacrosanct to the PC ideology all the time. No out rage though about that! Plus how many new laws have we seen implemented with words that the average joe would think, "Sounds Good" with out even knowing what in it??? Like Obama care?

All I have seen are opinions of what it will do and I have yet to see proof of the claims from the chicken littles......

Just go back and see your previous "but Obama silencing...," comment.

That's what we're discussing while you're turning this into a right/left thing (shocker).

a reply to: seeker1963


Ho boy, this is going to have to be explained simply....


ISP's are a monopoly. By giving them unlimited agency to do as they see fit, you really think they'll work in the best interest of the consumer when they have every power available to bleed us dry?

They exist to make money. If you give them the power to make more money, they will use it to make more money. Only competition would make the system work as you imagine it, except there isn't any.

I’m actually optimistic...

When all of your providers inevitably scrap ATS it’ll just be us Brits left and then we can have more Brexit threads instead of Trump.

It’ll be just as partisan but with the addition of more cups of Tea.


I’ll miss some of you.

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

Rip censorship 2015-2017.

I apologize if I am not understanding you clearly here, but are you saying that Net Neutrality was censorship?

If so, would you mind explaining your meaning here?

Net neutrality is about protecting the public from big evil corporations via regulation, right?

Are Google, Youtube, Twitter, Amazon, Facebook, and Netflix big corporations? Why are they for net-neutrality, when the regulation wouldn't effect them either way? Any ISP would lose business if they hindered access to those platforms.

"Not if they're the only ISP in town". True, but net-neutrality makes it harder for startup ISPs to compete. Doesn't seem like it, what with supposedly being neutral, but then we look back at the above companies. They are giants in their field, and can do anything they want. They won't be punished for playing favorites with their content like censoring content of people on the right or stifling competition. They are "too big" now, net-neutrality and greased palms helped them get there. Wonder why we haven't seen a new search engine get big? Or another Youtube/Twitter?

"They're private companies and can do what they want with their service". Then why was the argument for net-neutrality to prevent ISPs from charging other companies for using their infrastructure?

a reply to: RomeByFire

Not a left/right thing, but a corporate/consumer thing. Not a surprise who is winning.

originally posted by: Painterz
Congratulations America, Trump has just allowed your ISPs to screw you over even more than you are already being screwed over.

Prepare to start paying through the nose for everything. And you already pay about 3 times as much for your internet as people in Europe do.

At least we aren't arrested for online posts. Freedom of speech and all.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
Gonna revisit this thread in a year 10 bucks says nothing has changed

You hope you'll be able to visit this thread in a year, right?

I was able to visit routinely prior to 2015.

Why would that change now?