This net neutrality move seems a good thing.

a reply to: JinMI

Yes, I would not use them if they participated in things that I felt were predatory or grossly profitable without any reason. Chance are if that I am not using them, I'm probably not alone. Thus this creates a market.

If you only have one option, and that option limits or throttles what you want to view, you have no choice. There is no market that is being created, there is a restriction to the access of information.

It is not cheap to create or maintain infrastructure or service, and why Net Neutrality is a good thing. It equals the playing field and prevents further monopoly.

Folks seem to think government holds all the answers to their ills.

Folks seem to think anything the government attempts to do even when it ultimately benefits them adds to their ills. That's the problem.

It's funny that people think government preventing corporations from imposing their own for-profit restrictions on content that was once equally available but allowing corporations to regulate their content as they see fit is a good thing.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nwtrucker

The end of free speech....Hmmm. Are we talking 'free' as in no cost? Or are we talking 'free' as in the right/choice?

"We're sorry, comment section is disabled at your current subscriber level (Click here to upgrade)."

Ah, so free as in no cost.

Hey! There's always the dark web....

Without an ISP, you cant get there from here.

Like saying, I can drive without a license as long as I don't get caught.

a reply to: nwtrucker

I know what the land before interwebz was like. I wont have as much problem returning to the 'good ol' dark ages.

Todays younger set... are gonna freak. Maybe they'll revolt.

About time.

a reply to: JinMI

I see 5 options from your area (assuming I know). Is that correct?

For landlines? Incorrect.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Ever have to sit through the 30 second unskippable ads on a YouTube video? Thanks net-neutrality...

Exactly. Notice the slow encroachment, they won't destroy free roaming internet access all at once either.

They do it in stages. Just like the YouTube ads...

As consumers we pay ISPs to get a certain level of connection to the Internet, via the last mile the ISPs operate. We do not pay for any kind of "guarantee" to be able to reach a certain website or video service, with a certain level of quality. Many think that is what they are paying for, but it isn't.

I hear you. If you own a computer you're in for hundreds already. Most people have a monitor, printer, and whatnot. Then a land line to run the ethernet over and an ISP to pay a monthly fee to.

But that just the beginning.

If you have a clunker car you drive in the slow lane on the freeway. You still have to be licensed, smogged, registered and insured.

Your mileage may vary.

a reply to: intrptr

Yep. Lmao.

Cribbage, anyone?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nwtrucker

I know what the land before interwebz was like. I wont have as much problem returning to the 'good ol' dark ages.

Todays younger set... are gonna freak. Maybe they'll revolt.

About time.

Business won't be effected...

No businesses rely on the Internet.

You do realize we have been living with Obama's net neutrality since 2015 right?

So before 2015, you are saying that the internet was horrible. Were you this upset before 2015? I doubt it.

The point is by getting rid of this so called net neutrality, we are going back to before 2015. Before government wanted full control. You do realize that net neutrality is government internet socialism right? What good has the government done once it takes over an industry? Answer....nothing. All the major advances in the internet and all the websites you use today like Netflix, Amazon and eBay all came into existence and flourished BEFORE 2015.

Bottom line: It's a good thing "net neutrality" is gone. Don't let the government near anything unless you want it destroyed.

a reply to: intrptr

It brings to mind an NCIS episode where the computers were down for an extended time. Gibbs brings out a box full of Polaroid cameras. he crew looks stunned. Then having to physically go through a massive number of boxes looking for documents, connections to the case....it was funny.

originally posted by: WhatTheory
You do realize we have been living with Obama's net neutrality since 2015 right?

You clearly understand nothing about net neutrality and haven't bothered to educate yourself by reading this thread. Net neutrality existed before 2015. It was part of the core ethos of the internet at its origin. It was formalised in law in 2015 precisely because it was under threat at the time.

The concept of net neutrality is not difficult. It predates the internet in fact. A New York undertaker, Almon Strowger, invented the first automatic telephone exchange in 1889 because it dawned on him that the wife of another undertaker who worked at the (manual) telephone exchange was redirecting his customers to her husband.

Revoking net neutrality is allowing the ISPs to circumvent the automatic, unbiased exchange of information and tamper with the connections as they see fit.

originally posted by: EvilAxis
Net neutrality existed before 2015. It was part of the core ethos of the internet at its origin.

Sorry, but you just lost all credibility with that opinion.

When I designed the World Wide Web, I built it as an open platform to foster collaboration and innovation. The Web evolved into a powerful and ubiquitous platform because I was able to build it on an open network that treated all packets of information equally. This principle of net neutrality has kept the Internet a free and open space since its inception.

Tim Berners Lee

a reply to: EvilAxis

Where is the link to that quote?
I seriously doubt his definition is NOT the same as Obama's net neutrality. Do you really think he would have wanted total government control of "his" invention? I doubt it.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: interupt42

If all this comes into play, does this mean a possible resurgence of internet cafes that offer 'premium service for a small user fee?

Perhaps some computers with connections to some groupings and others to different ones? Take your pick?

With change there comes opportunities...

This doesn't work because it's not just the speed you buy that will determine the speed you can download content. It's also reliant on the deals that each website makes with each ISP. If you want to read ATS for example, and their host (godaddy) doesn't sign a specific contract with whatever ISP you or that internet cafe is using, your access could be slowed down or outright denied.

In reality, this will probably never happen to basic webpages, but to sites with streaming video? It's extremely likely, because curbing video streaming is what this whole thing is ultimately about.

Right now there's basically two points in a connection. There's the host which pays for service, and then there's the client who pays for service. What removing NN does, is it allows the ISP's to get inbetween these two points and put a price and access speed on each connection to each other connection regardless of whatever service tiers the involved parties are already paying for.

originally posted by: WhatTheory
a reply to: EvilAxis

Where is the link to that quote?
I seriously doubt his definition is NOT the same as Obama's net neutrality. Do you really think he would have wanted total government control of "his" invention? I doubt it.

Please take time to read this thread from the start, so we don't go over it all again as if it didn't happen. Net Neutrality has absolutely nothing to do with "total government control". Quite the opposite.

The quote was from Tim Berners Lee discussing the matter in 2015 when it was last under threat:Net Neutrality in Europe: A Statement From Sir Tim Berners Lee

Do read what he says. You might benefit. I linked to Wikipedia because, based on the level of your debate, I wasn't sure you knew who he is.

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Uhhh....it's expensive because of satellites and infrastructure. You gonna lease Comcast lines?

Yep
And if you lease Comcast lines, you just made Comcast your landlord Daddy
That is making them bigger, not competing with them.

Leasing isn't possible for broadband unless those who own the lines aren't providing service. When we were moving to broadband and DSL was the main technology, thanks to a lack of regulation on prices to access telephone lines at high frequencies, the telecom's sold access to the lines at the same price they charged for DSL, so that they could claim to be offering access but in reality, making it impossible for anyone to compete against them on price.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
The thing is, if an ISP does this, you can change your DNS, or get a VPn for a couple bucks a month. That's what people in China have to do because of how regulated the internet is

VPN's and DNS do not get you around a removal of NN practices.

originally posted by: WhatTheory
You do realize we have been living with Obama's net neutrality since 2015 right?

So before 2015, you are saying that the internet was horrible. Were you this upset before 2015? I doubt it.

The point is by getting rid of this so called net neutrality, we are going back to before 2015. Before government wanted full control. You do realize that net neutrality is government internet socialism right? What good has the government done once it takes over an industry? Answer....nothing. All the major advances in the internet and all the websites you use today like Netflix, Amazon and eBay all came into existence and flourished BEFORE 2015.

Bottom line: It's a good thing "net neutrality" is gone. Don't let the government near anything unless you want it destroyed.

You have clearly not read the thread.

originally posted by: EvilAxis
Net Neutrality has absolutely nothing to do with "total government control". Quite the opposite.

It has everything to do with the government.

Just because this guy like Al Gore "invented" the internet does not mean he understands politics. Just because he was a nerd does not mean he understands or comprehends what the government will do once they sink their teeth into it.

originally posted by: intrptr
Free roaming of the whole internet will be reorganized to tiered packages of access, the more you want to surf and participate, the more it will cost. The bottom tier, (Basic service package) will limit the user to channel surfing only, commercial ads, comments disabled, censorship to g or pg rated videos and content, just like on cable tv. You can change channels, scroll, mute the commercials and pay for a whole bunch of channels you will never watch.

Good thing huh?

Censorship, a 'good' thing...

lol and going over the top beyond rational must also be a "good" thing to you. the sky isnt falling. at best youll miss out on netflix, hulu or some other streaming service as they negotiate a deal with the isp just like u see with television companies like direct tv and comcast these days when some channel or another doesnt feel like paying the rate they are charging.