When will net neutrailty repeal take affect

[Donut417]

15 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

Yes they can, if they choose to convene a review. That is what checks and balances are... They can stop anything the executive branch (and its agencies) attempts.

Republican FCC, Republican President, Republican Congress. So no review will happen. Nothing will happen till 2019. 

[beavo451]

4 minutes ago, Eduard the weeb said:

yeah @beavo451 is right and I fucking hate that he is because the internet is suck a great place and the government is fucking it up taking down the only thing keeping it from ISP just ass raping us

The only thing?  It was just the FCC saying that an ISP is a common carrier. Which they had given themselves the authority to regulate ISPs in 2015. It’s like a fire department saying hey traffic laws fall under us now and we will start enforcing traffic law. 

 

You know what else are common carriers?  Airlines, telephones, cable companies, etc.

 

And they all have tiered levels of service. 

[Eduard the weeb]

2 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Republican FCC, Republican President, Republican Congress. So no review will happen. Nothing will happen till 2019. 

Yeah have a feeling Dems will win in next cycle because if a party with full control cannot get there shit together and agree on something they are normally replaced with a shake down by the other party.

[knightslugger]

24 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Republican FCC, Republican President, Republican Congress. So no review will happen. Nothing will happen till 2019. 

you have to look past the partisan lines. Establishment Republicans have more in common with Democrats on an ideological level than they do with grassroots conservative foundation they stand upon. Over 80% of congress doesn't want anything to do with what happens in the oval office.

 

the days of R vs D are over. they are one and the same. the only thing that stand anything apart in government today is ideology: Conservative vs Liberal.

[knightslugger]

35 minutes ago, beavo451 said:

Cellphone companies have brought back “unlimited” plans.

with or without the quotes...?

 

because the goal of NN was WITHOUT quotes.

[TheCherryKing]

32 minutes ago, Eduard the weeb said:

Yeah have a feeling Dems will win in next cycle because if a party with full control cannot get there shit together and agree on something they are normally replaced with a shake down by the other party.

Even though I don't want that to happen I agree that it will happen. 

[beavo451]

11 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

with or without the quotes...?

 

because the goal of NN was WITHOUT quotes.

With quotes.  And “unlimited” plans were still in place with “net neutrality”.

 

And no. All data is the same doesn’t mean that a provider has to give you unlimited data. 

[knightslugger]

16 minutes ago, beavo451 said:

With quotes.  And “unlimited” plans were still in place with “net neutrality”.

 

And no. All data is the same doesn’t mean that a provider has to give you unlimited data. 

and now you get that data at a variably regulated speed not based on network load, but because they don't like pewdiepie (or whatever horseshit reason they come up with, not that you will ever be told because now they don't have to disclose why they throttle).

 

Is that the part you like?

[beavo451]

7 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

and now you get that data at a variably regulated speed not based on network load, but because they don't like pewdiepie (or whatever horseshit reason they come up with, not that you will ever be told because now they don't have to disclose why they throttle).

 

Is that the part you like?

Who said I like anything? I’m challenging whether or not the 2015 “net neutrality” actually did anything. 

 

So to counter the throttled speed. If all data was treated equally and the ISPs are not able to load balance then they could enact per byte charge. So the $1.99 per google search thing? Just change it to $1.99 per byte since we all love extremes and hysterics. 

[knightslugger]

35 minutes ago, beavo451 said:

Who said I like anything? I’m challenging whether or not the 2015 “net neutrality” actually did anything. 

 

So to counter the throttled speed. If all data was treated equally and the ISPs are not able to load balance then they could enact per byte charge. So the $1.99 per google search thing? Just change it to $1.99 per byte since we all love extremes and hysterics. 

and the FTC could get involved over unfair business practices if they did, because they were REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE IT. No longer is that the case with repeal. They could have done it then and face an FTC review, and they can do it now, WITHOUT review. how is that a good thing? i know you're not saying you like it, but how is it that look past the ethics of it all? NN could have been left in place and ISPs could have upgraded the living hell out of their networks with all the money Congress was throwing at them, but they didn't want NN, so they said "Well, we CAN'T upgrade our networks because we have to spend all this money on NOT DOING ANYTHING." effectively holding the country hostage by choking the network with network upgrade inaction.

 

.GOV: NN is a thing, here's a shit ton of money to upgrade your networks.

ISPs: We don't want NN.

.GOV: too bad, take the money, build your networks up already.

ISPs: No. We don't want NN. But we'll take your money, use it to lobby against NN until you change your mind.

.GOV: So why wont you upgrade your networks so that consumers wont be effected?

ISPs: because we don't want NN. repeal it and then send us more money.

.GOV: If we repeal it, what guarantees do we have that you won't fuck the customers?

ISPs: none. TRUST US to do the right thing.

 

FFWD to 2017:

 

.GOV: NN is gone, now do the right thing.

ISPs: HA! You're no longer the lord of us, have a nice day!

.GOV: ...fuck...

[beavo451]

22 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

and the FTC could get involved over unfair business practices if they did, because they were REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE IT. No longer is that the case with repeal. They could have done it then and face an FTC review, and they can do it now, WITHOUT review. how is that a good thing? i know you're not saying you like it, but how is it that look past the ethics of it all? NN could have been left in place and ISPs could have upgraded the living hell out of their networks with all the money Congress was throwing at them, but they didn't want NN, so they said "Well, we CAN'T upgrade our networks because we have to spend all this money on NOT DOING ANYTHING." effectively holding the country hostage by choking the network with network upgrade inaction.

 

.GOV: NN is a thing, here's a shit ton of money to upgrade your networks.

ISPs: We don't want NN.

.GOV: too bad, take the money, build your networks up already.

ISPs: No. We don't want NN. But we'll take your money, use it to lobby against NN until you change your mind.

.GOV: So why wont you upgrade your networks so that consumers wont be effected?

ISPs: because we don't want NN. repeal it and then send us more money.

.GOV: If we repeal it, what guarantees do we have that you won't fuck the customers?

ISPs: none. TRUST US to do the right thing.

 

FFWD to 2017:

 

.GOV: NN is gone, now do the right thing.

ISPs: HA! You're no longer the lord of us, have a nice day!

.GOV: ...fuck...

As provided by another poster the FTC has no regulating authority over AT&T because AT&T as an entity is a common carrier. Whether or not that ruling applies to all ISPs is up in the air. 

 

Required to disclose? So the companies are required to tell on themselves? Do you actually think that happened?

 

So the government forcefully subsidized a private company? And when the company didn’t do what the government wanted there was no repercussions?

 

You mentioned that FTC could regulate the industry. But then you are saying that nobody can regulate now. Which one is it?

[knightslugger]

14 minutes ago, beavo451 said:

Required to disclose? So the companies are required to tell on themselves? Do you actually think that happened?

At the penalty of an FTC review, i'm pretty sure that kept them from doing anything that would be unfair to a consumer because if they DIDN'T disclose it, it'd be a slam dunk for the FTC.

 

14 minutes ago, beavo451 said:

So the government forcefully subsidized a private company? And when the company didn’t do what the government wanted there was no repercussions?

Ubiquitous in industry as a whole. Generally called Pork and government waste.

 

14 minutes ago, beavo451 said:

You mentioned that FTC could regulate the industry. But then you are saying that nobody can regulate now. Which one is it?

In this instance the FTC is the authority and the FCC is the regulatory. and now neither one has any power over ISPs because the FCC voted to remove their own powers to regulate them while at the same time granting them no requirement to disclose anything to the FTC, therefore, the FTC has nothing to charge them with. that's putting is extremely basic and probably requires more explanation than i have time for.

 

bet me. Five years down the road, we'll all be wondering what broadband companies let me watch pewdiepie on youtube.

[beavo451]

1 minute ago, knightslugger said:

 

 

bet me. Five years down the road, we'll all be wondering what broadband companies let me watch pewdiepie on youtube.

Sure. That’s if Google/YouTube themselves don’t censor pewdiepie themselves as they are trying to do with other channels right now. And that has nothing to do with government regulation of ISPs. 

 

Regulation and authority are synonmous when it comes to government. So if the FCC votes to start regulation and then voluntarily stops it, guess what? I bet the FTC could do the same thing. 

[asus killer]

3 hours ago, beavo451 said:

Your analogy is an argument against “net neutrality” regulations. Real world roads are that way and full of congestion. How does it take the government to improve or fix a road?

maybe not a good analogy. But the roads are so for everyone, it's not like some have better roads then others, you can go to any road and don't pay more.

 

Oh just forget the analogy 

[ultimatemythbuster]

21 hours ago, Gamingfreek said:

Now that Net Neutrality is gone, what now?

 

Should we look into getting a VPN to circumvent the things to come?  Would it even help at all?

Wouldn't really help because ISPs can just totally block all VPN traffic, or put it in the most expensive tier.

[ultimatemythbuster]

21 hours ago, RAM555789 said:

Your in a contract with your ISP, which is typically 2 years, so whenever that 2-year time period is up is whenever they can change the contract if you choose to renew your internet, however like I've said on other posts, if they go and start throttling speeds people will go apeshit, worse than Reddit vs EA, and the fear of having stocks drop would keep internet companies in place for now.

I've never had an ISP require a contract on a residential connection; only business and enterprise connections.  Which ISPs have contracts for residential?

[knightslugger]

4 minutes ago, ultimatemythbuster said:

Wouldn't really help because ISPs can just totally block all VPN traffic, or put it in the most expensive tier.

because only businesses and enterprise clients have a REAL use for VPN, so why not put them in THOSE tiers...?

 

nothing unfair about that practice... nothing to see here... move along...

2 minutes ago, ultimatemythbuster said:

I've never had an ISP require a contract on a residential connection; only business and enterprise connections.  Which ISPs have contracts for residential?

My ISP does. 2-years @ $30/mo with equipment incuded locked contract rate. after 2 years, it's M2M at $40 and the equipment is yours.

 

lots of ISPs have contracts for residential...

[ultimatemythbuster]

1 minute ago, knightslugger said:

because only businesses and enterprise clients have a REAL use for VPN, so why not put them in THOSE tiers...?

 

nothing unfair about that practice... nothing to see here... move along...

Maybe I need to get a friend in Canada.  I live close enough to the border that I could get some Ubiquiti point to point gear and send all my traffic through Canada.

[Max_Settings]

22 hours ago, silentprototipe said:

Ohh god, im scared for what's going to happen to gaming personally. I spend too much time online for this shit dammit  

Just go back to what you did on the Internet before 2015. That's only how long we've had Net Neutrality, since 2015.

[Eduard the weeb]

Just now, Max_Settings said:

Just go back to what you did on the Internet before 2015. That's only how long we've had Net Neutrality, since 2015.

yeah but it was created becuase ISP were abusing there power and now they will abuse the it to even greater lengths now.

[GDRRiley]

3 hours ago, knightslugger said:

Google is probably the worst offender when it comes to censoring the internet because of their personal agenda... wake up guys...

we know but they threaten other ISPs to offer better service.

[divito]

3 hours ago, beavo451 said:

The only thing?  It was just the FCC saying that an ISP is a common carrier. Which they had given themselves the authority to regulate ISPs in 2015. It’s like a fire department saying hey traffic laws fall under us now and we will start enforcing traffic law. 

 

You know what else are common carriers?  Airlines, telephones, cable companies, etc.

 

And they all have tiered levels of service. 

Right, so because these others industries screw over consumers, let's let the ISPs in on that too.

[divito]

38 minutes ago, ultimatemythbuster said:

I've never had an ISP require a contract on a residential connection; only business and enterprise connections.  Which ISPs have contracts for residential?

A lot of them don't outright call it a contract, just essentially a service agreement. 

[ultimatemythbuster]

25 minutes ago, divito said:

A lot of them don't outright call it a contract, just essentially a service agreement. 

Just one more reason why everybody should read through all of the fine print before agreeing to stuff.  I wonder how many people have used iTunes to create Nuclear, Chemical, or Biological weapons without realizing they were violating the EULA?

[Michael McAllister]

The fight for Net Neutrality is not over.  Please call your Congressmen and Senators, and ask them to propose a Resolution of Disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to overturn yesterday's FCC decision.  The number for the US Capitol Switchboard in Washington, D.C. is (202) 224-3121.  Thanks!