Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'neutrality'.
Found 20 results
-
I'd like to start by saying I couldn't find anything in the Tech News Section - so if there is an original article, I apologise. Sources: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39973787 https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/net-neutrality-goes-down-in-flames-as-fcc-votes-to-kill-title-ii-rules/ Net Neutrality came into place in 2015 under the supervision of FCC Chair Man - Tom Wheeler. Well, 2 years later, it has been removed under the new FCC advisor Ajit Pai. The Commissioners at the FCC decided to vote 2:1 on whether or not to kill of Net Neutrality. My Pai has said on multiple times that: My quick note: Excuse me? What???? For those who don't know what net neutrality is, oh I'm sorry, Was: After looking through multiple articles: it's more the fact that this was a preliminary vote, A final vote is due later in the Year. My thoughts: WHAT THE ACTUAL F**K AMERICA?!?!? Net Neutrality was a great thing. it allowed for more fairness in a market controlled by the few big ISPs and allowed for all content to be delivered on an equal playing field - not a "Premium Fast Lane" Also - Surprise, Surprise - Ajit Pai was actually "Associate General Counsel" at Verizon Communications, a company that has always been against Net Neutrality. Something which shows that ISP's will do anything to get out of the Title 2 classification where they can't charge for such services. A chart found on the DailyDot website shows what companies are spending the most to dismantle Net Neutrality. And I have a feeling that most of that went on Lobbying all members of the FCC / Governement who are against the FCC. Here is another chart to show the momentum of which Lobbying has increased over Net Neutrality: I honestly think lobbying should be made illegal since its basically putting wallets before what is in the best interest of the people. Will it ever stop? No, not when there is money to be made - but it doesn't make it any more right. Your Thoughts? Please Leave them down below!
-
Guys please put this code in your header to support net neutrality! https://pastebin.com/053m1Kz3 <script type="text/javascript"> var _bftn_options = { /* * Choose from 'money', 'stop', and 'slow'. Omit this property to get the * default theme. */ theme: 'slow', // @type {string} /* * Or, if you want your own custom theme, specify its properties here. * Unspecified options will fall back to the default values. */ theme: { className: 'money', // @type {string} will be applied to iframe body tag logos: ['images/money.png', 'images/stop.png'], // @type {Array} img src values headline: 'This is the web without net neutrality.', // @type {string} modal headline text body: 'Cable companies want to get rid of net neutrality. Without it, sites like ours could be censored, slowed down, or forced to charge extra fees. We can stop them and keep the Internet open, fast, and awesome if we all contact Congress and the FCC, but we only have a few days left.' // @type {string} modal body text }, /* * Choose from 'fp' for Free Press, 'dp' for Demand Progress or * 'fftf' for Fight for the Future. Omit this property to randomly split * form submissions between all organizations in the Battle for the Net * coalition. */ org: 'fftf', // @type {string} /* * Specify a delay (in milliseconds) before showing the widget. Defaults to one * second. */ delay: 1000, // @type {number} /* * Specify a date on which to display the widget. Defaults to July 12th, 2017 if * omitted. ISO-8601 dates are UTC time, three-argument dates (with a zero-based * month) are local time. */ date: new Date(2017, 6, 12), // @type {Date} /* * If you show the modal on your homepage, you should let users close it to * access your site. However, if you launch a new tab to open the modal, closing * the modal just leaves the user staring at a blank page. Set this to true to * prevent closing the modal - the user can close the tab to dismiss it. Defaults * to false. */ uncloseable: false, // @type {Boolean} /* * Prevents the widget iframe from loading Google Analytics. Defaults to false. */ disableGoogleAnalytics: false, // @type {Boolean} /* * Always show the widget. Useful for testing. */ always_show_widget: true // @type {Boolean} }; </script>
-
For those of you who don't know Videotron, it is a Quebec-based telecommunications company. Just like Bell, Rogers and Telus, they offer Internet access, cable and mobile plans in Quebec. However, earlier this week, Videotron made a splash in the Quebec tel-co scene. They released their new "Unlimited Music" service that allows users to stream music form partner services without it counting towards their mobile data cap. Such partners include Spotify, Rdio, Google Play Music and others. Any user who currently has a Premium Plan (starting at $64.95) has access to "Unlimited Music" (Source: Videotron). That sounds really good on paper. While I would be more than glad to use this service (my current plan with Videotron doesn't allow it), I can't help but think about the CRTC's ruling back in January. They specifically ruled that Bell and Videotron are not allowed to stream their mobile TV content without it counting towards the user's mobile data cap. Such practice would give an unfair advantage to Videotron's and Bell's own media companies and violate principles of net neutrality (Source: Net neutrality: CRTC bans Bell from subsidizing data usage for mobile TV app). However, the situation is a bit different than what happened back in January. Videotron's partners in offering this service (Spotify, Rdio, etc.) are not owned by Videotron. Surely, this cannot be seen as an anti-competitive behaviour, right? Well, while Videotron is saying that any organization can become a partner and be streamed free of data caps, they do not say if there is a fee for these partners or if there is any other requirement (Source: Videotron bets on mobile streaming future, eyes new users with ‘Unlimited Music’). I personally think that an offer like this could deter newcomers in the music streaming world to enter the already small Quebec market if they have to pay to have access to Videotron's unlimited network. What if other tel-co join Videotron in this endeavour? Music streaming companies are either going to have to chose between the different carriers or pay every carrier for unlimited access which could ultimately lead them to charge more for access to their streaming services. On the other hand, Videotron's offer could push competitors in offering more competitive services by, say, raising data caps without raising prices. I could be totally wrong and Videotron's new service is a step in the right direction for the Canadian mobile Internet. I guess we will have to wait for someone who's well-versed in net neutrality to stream music from a service that wasn't partnered with Videotron and see what happens. What do you think? Is this a step in the right direction or a complete offense on net neutrality? -
FCC chair: Move on from net neutrality debate, overbuild each other's territory. Tom Wheeler, putting cable companies in their place once again, this time effectively telling them to STFU and actually get on with the business of doing their business and not crying about how things are now forcing them to do the competition they should've done in the first place. Wheeler isn't wrong. Cable companies create local monopolies just to avoid undercutting their prices, no wonder they are all shitting bricks because for the first time in their lives they'll have to directly compete in areas they have stayed away from. I say bring it on. This is a win for the consumers in every imaginable way, ISPs need to get with the program already. http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/tom-wheeler-tells-cable-industry-to-stop-complaining-start-competing/ -
http://recode.net/2015/08/12/nbcuniversal-buys-big-chunks-of-vox-media-and-buzzfeed/ Read it yourself. Obviously Re/code is owned by Vox, so it's one sided but still. Let's discuss below. How one-sided will Verge articles be now? I'm interested to see what will happen to The Verge's credibility more than anything.
-
If India is getting and understanding the concept of net neutrality right, I don't see why other developed nations can't do it. Facebook's internet.org while seeming innocent, does have a larger agenda. What would you choose? Which is a lesser evil ? Some form of internet access with Facebook pumping in funds and sacrifice some amounts of net neutrality or Have difficulty getting access to the internet with no large organization like Facebook pumping in funds and getting it right from the beginning ? Source: http://www.theverge.com/2015/4/20/8456943/india-net-neutrality-facebook-internet-org-zero-rating
-
Some people might wonder why a lot is being posted about NN and ISPs (and their shenanigans). Well, wonder no more. Because things like this are very important to the tech industry (and other industries) and it is my opinion that people need to care about things like this and no be apathetic. Plus, we get to witness corporate smackdowns like the one Google is happily delivering to other ISPs with their rollout of their Fibre services. I love that they are essentially goading the ISPs into rising up to their taunts with respect to T2 reclassifications. Sure, Google has a excellent track record of starting a lot of interesting ventures and then just giving up, I'd like to think that NN and their pursuit of being a ISP (if only to get other ISPs to smarten up) will last and will be taken seriously. http://bgr.com/2015/01/29/google-fiber-vs-comcast-att-net-neutrality/
-
Wheeler: If slow speeds are enough, why do you heavily promote faster service? Before we begin, allow me to present this simple checklist to demonstrate what Tom Wheeler has lobbed at the ISPs... ☐ rekt ☐ not rekt ☑ Tyrannosaurus rekt I applaud the balls that Wheeler is displaying against these guys with the FCCs latest ruling and just how persistent Wheeler has become. Maybe he realized his very career was on the line if he didn't see the light OR he simply saw the light and has decided to do his job and secure even this for the American citizens. I don't know, I just know that I'm glad the FCC (and with the latest bandwidth use rulings by the FTC) are shoving the ISPs into a vice just a little more and forcing them to get with the program even if they don't want to. The ISPs never seem to want to do anything these days, we need these kinds of shots across the bow it seems to send a message. @http://arstechnica.c...1&post=28254929 http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/01/fcc-chairman-mocks-industry-claims-that-customers-dont-need-faster-internet/
-
Tom Wheeler, head of the F.C.C., is expected to call for reclassifying high-speed Internet as a telecommunications service. Agency Would Regulate Broadband Providers Tightly Like Telecommunications Firms Those who wanted Title II reclassification, eat your hearts out. Looks like the FCC and Wheeler are going to go ahead after all and exercise their power to reclassify. "FCC using their ban hammer" could be the title of this, because thats basically what the FCC is about to do. The best part? This: Oh yes, he's starting it soon. Now, passing with a majority might be difficult given how hard these guys will lobby against it, but its promising to see it happen all the same. http://www.wsj.com/articles/fcc-to-propose-strong-net-neutrality-rules-1422911055
-
Panel to Investigate Whether White House Improperly Influenced Agency on Broadband Rules Oh you darling Republicans, always assuming that something is wrong and needing to throw any wrench possible in any sort of forward movement possible. Seems like some in the House don't like how close the FCC appears to be to the White House, even though Wheeler has maintained how independent the FCC is and the Republicans question the timing of Wheelers announcement just after comments made by POTUS on net neutrality. In my personal opinion, the Republicans can't handle that for once in a long time, the FCC (and by extension, the Government) is going to do something that HELPS normal consumers and puts the pressure on companies to do a better job and be more competitive AND takes the wind out of their lobbying efforts by regulating them like the good old utilities they should be. The Republicans aren't innocent of bias in this. Their version of net neutrality would in effect CRIPPLE the FCC entirely and get rid of any power they had. I prefer the current position that Wheeler has over the madness that the elephants want to bring about. http://www.wsj.com/articles/republicans-vow-to-fight-fcc-broadband-proposal-1423240213
- 48 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- net
- neutrality
- (and 4 more)
-
Documents reveal the cozy relationship between lobbyists, officials, and the FCC Well, well, well. What do we have here? More collusion between Comcast, TWC and the FCC? Say it ain't so! If you've been wondering who actually supported Comcast in this and how anyone could, rest easy. Most people probably aren't. Comcast has been busy drumming up ghost letters without the "authors" approval on any level what so ever, and everyone has been turning a blind eye to this because support is support and I imagine someone at the FCC got their share of "support" to allow these "support" to be considered valid. Naughty, naughty Comcast. As a forum, especially our US residents, we should care more about a situation like this. If people were to be so invested in a scenario like this as they are in other manners affecting this site, imagine how powerful a message we could send to those in charge that we will not go quietly into that good night. http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/26/7878239/comcast-twc-fcc-merger-letters-politicians-ghostwritten
-
AT&T CEO: 'There Will Be Litigation' on Net Neutrality
Victorious Secret posted a topic in Tech News
If the FCC is committed to its current path, "there will be litigation," Randall Stephenson told CNBC. Oh AT&T, can't you just get with the program instead of bringing the lawyers into everything? Lawyers take the fun out of everything, threats about using lawyers is even less fun. Do you guys not like fun? I guess not. I hope AT&T understands that if the FCC votes in favour of this, they'll have all the backing the government has. Including access to as much money as they need to put these ISPs and carriers into line. Lawsuits? Is that really a good idea? You want some bored government lawyer saying "ATT suing the government? I'm bored, I'll take the case" If the vote fails, so be it. If it succeeds, these greedy goons better pray they don't get abused. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2476844,00.asp?fullsite=true -
Original Article: http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/12/fcc-open-internet-order-net-neutrality/ A few weeks ago, The FCC voted to grant Net Neutrality, but their wording seemed a little confusing for some, until now. The FCC has just released a 400 page document outlining the rule sit intends to use to protect the new Open Internet, for Net Neutrality. If you have got some spare time, you can read the whole document here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/258496522/FCC-Open-Internet-Order-February-2015 My Thoughts? Its about time. I'm not American, but I can vaguely understand the idea behind Net Neutrality. Some of their wording during the verdict, did seem a bit ambiguous. Well now that has been cleared up, it should help alot of people, including me. When I have some spare time, I might read this a bit to get some more in-depth information. Your thoughts? Please leave them down below. EDIT: You know that whole thing about the document being around 400 pages? Turns out Engadget was lying. Its more like 600. I quote Engadget as saying: EDIT 2: Screw the length of the document. I think we can all agree on that is a bloody long document, lol -
Oh boy, just when you think sanity might prevail in the US political system, one side stands up in the name of asshattery to remind us why every piece of political news should come with a bag of popcorn or two. The House Judiciary Committee seems to be engaging in typical fear mongering tactics to pain the FCCs recent moves in the worst possible light, even going so far as to ignoring some service providers who have stated they are OKAY with the NN rules the FCC passed. Come on. When you have ISPs saying "so what, we'll adapt" and "it won't be a detriment to us", you can't possibly expect that your fear mongering will hold water, will you? https://www.techdirt.com/blog/netneutrality/articles/20150302/08162630183/hysterical-facts-optional-assault-fccs-new-neutrality-rules-has-commenced.shtml
-
The company says the FCC overreached by passing rules to stop Internet service providers from blocking sites and slowing traffic. The problem is, Comcast’s admitted to doing just that. I guess its hard to sue the FCC over imposing rules that you've been violating the entire time already, among other dodgy practices over the previous decade. ATT and Verizon seem happy to sue, Comcast might still lobby like hell, but one of their VPs as of today has said they won't being suing the FCC over the latest rulings. This does go at odds against the Exec. VP Cohen who said that they will be suing, so who knows whats going on in Comcasts ranks and who actually supports the FCC ruling and who doesn't. Very interesting development. Might suggest that there are certain execs who are okay with the ruling and those who aren't. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/26/comcast-we-will-sue-to-slow-the-web.html
-
Hey Europe, wanna stop being so backwards and get with the consumer friendly program of what net neutrality should be? That would be nice. Giving ISPs the freedom to offer two tiers is going to ASSURE that they offer two tiers and hold both consumers and business like Google and Netflix by the balls for payments. This affects everyone. Consumers over there already enjoy speedy internet access on the cheap, but these rules would make corporations pay more just to have the proper speeds they need to deliver their content, on top of the fact that they need to pay for pipelines in the first place. http://fortune.com/2015/03/04/net-neutrality-is-not-for-europe/
-
Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, conceded that Democrats are lining up with President Obama in favor of the F.C.C. position on net neutrality. It seems like the Republicans who were moving to block/ban/banhammer/sue/litigate themselves out of the net neutrality issue might be starting to back off as they realize just how much support this has, not just in the government but amongst the tech giants of the industry who have more wealth to throw around in Pro-NN lobbying than the Republicans have been getting in anti-NN lobbying. Hell, this isn't even a party issue. Something like NN comes down to the best interests of companies and consumers alike, with the exception of the ISPs who are scrambling to figure out how they're going to survive in a world without the ability to price gouge the hell out of everyone and everything that so much as plugs into a 56K modem. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/25/technology/path-clears-for-net-neutrality-ahead-of-fcc-vote.html?emc=edit_na_20150224&nlid=50762010
-
Well, thats it folks. It happened. ISPs are now utilities under Title II, the FCC passed it by 3-2. Net neutrality is a thing. Don't expect it to just be over, however. Many groups have strongly suggested that they will have lawsuits against the FCC over this ruling, what does it matter now that the FCC has a proper ruling in place AND most likely will have congressional backing from the democrats on this. So the big vote is happening today and since its a pretty important topic I figured I would make one thread to keep all the news of today in order. I think its important and I think people should care about what goes on. That being said, here is the first piece of news I've come across for the day, involving Google (and others) pushing the FCC to update their language on NN to prevent ISPs from having a loophole to abuse. The loophole in question would have allowed ISPs to charge websites for sending content to their consumers. We can argue that this is a good thing AND we can argue that Google (and others) are flexing their lobbying power after seeing how the game is played; we can debate if thats a good or bad thing later but for now its a good thing in this scenario. Update #2 Ajit Pai is going all out against NN and is making some frankly embarrassing statements for someone who should be better educated in the issue at hand. 5 guesses as to which ISP is funding his next political campaign. He claims that NN will hurt companies, which is ironic since stocks shot up when Wheeler announced his plans. Oh boy, someone is grasping at straws and edging closer to the "Think of the children" defence. This tweet really says it all about what the opposition to NN is like. Update #3 FCC overturns state laws that protect ISPs from local competition Municipal broadband networks could expand because of FCC's controversial vote. The FCC is on a roll today, effectively telling ISPs to tuck tail and run with a new ruling to allow municipalities to run their own show and not worry about ISPs blocking their moves. Something that supersedes state laws (as it should, since some states have no goddamn idea how to actually run the show) Update #4 Okay, these next parts are from the Verge stream so thats the source, its mainly of Wheelers comments as he is dropping bombs and being fairly serious about this all (I guess he got tired of the speeches delivered by Pai) THE AYES HAVE IT. NN PASSED! The vote passed 3-2, net neutrality as Wheeler wanted it (or as close to) has been passed by the FCC. Overall, this went how many people hoped it would go. Wheeler essentially did this the entire time: For those wondering what Wheeler is actually like, there is a nice background of the man and what he actually did before he became a FCC commissioner: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/fcc-chairman-tom-wheeler-net-neutrality-plan-google-115502.html http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/fcc-overturns-state-laws-that-protect-isps-from-local-competition/ http://live.theverge.com/fcc-title-ii-net-neutrality-live-blog/ http://www.engadget.com/2015/02/26/fcc-net-neutrality/ http://gizmodo.com/fcc-passes-strongest-net-neutrality-rules-in-americas-h-1688204371
- 213 replies
-
- 39
-
-
- net
- neutrality
- (and 8 more)
-
Internet providers need the freedom to block and throttle Internet traffic. Sigh. I mean... I've got nothing. This is a new level of stupid by the Republicans, and I've often been amazed at the stupid either side can pull off. You don't need a PhD to figure out where these people are getting their PAC money from (Ars however is nice and tells us just how much this one person got from ISPs). I hope Tom Wheeler shows up in court and beats these clowns a new one. Hell, even showing up in Congress would suffice. I can't believe the misinformation that people are spreading with regards to net neutrality and even worse are the people who are soaking up that misinformation and spreading it further. And yes, that quote was in comic sans. Why? Say stupid things, get stupid fonts. Thats why. http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/03/republicans-internet-freedom-act-would-wipe-out-net-neutrality/
- 93 replies
-
- 10
-
-
- 10 replies
-
- 11
-
-
- net net
- neutrality
- (and 3 more)
