Jump to content

Is Net-Neutrality bad?

Penny5837
By Penny5837
in General Discussion
 Share
Posted

My friend and I were having a conversation on why Net-Neutrality is good/bad. He has the argument that it is bad, but I think that it is good. Whats your opinion on this, and how would it effect you / the provider?

I think that it is good because it equal and better for everyone. I think it should be a thing because without it, the ISP's are just lining their pockets with money that they don't need.

Whats your opinion?

Another topic on this forum about net-neutrality if you're interested: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/395528-fcc-done-with-isps-making-excuses/page-4

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I really want to hear you friends argument lol

Magical Pineapples


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

I really want to hear you friends argument lol

He's not really a techie so I don't trust everything he says lol.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I think it's good.

Means ISPs can't charge unreal amounts for priority service (That's what I understand it is).

 

As the guy above me said, really want to hear what your friend's argument is.

Someone told Luke and Linus at CES 2017 to "Unban the legend known as Jerakl" and that's about all I've got going for me. (It didn't work)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

It's good.

 

There haven't been many times 'neutrality' isn't the better option. The internet is certainly not an exception.

"Normandy" i7 4790K - GTX 970 - Phantom 410 (Gun metal) - Z97 Extreme4 (asrock) - 128GB Crucial SSD - 1TB WD HDD - H60 Refurb. - 7 case fans | G710+ Keyboard, G230 Headset, Acer GN246HL Monitor.

Quick thoughts on system: I7 is extremely quick and I'm glad I spent the extra for hyper-threading. I regret my decision to get the GTX 970, it has horrible coil whine. There isn't any excuse for this terrible whine I and others are having. I HIGHLY recommend a 144hz monitor. Future Improvements/upgrades: Rubber fan mounts, basic speakers, more ram (for a total of 16gb), replace GPU.

144hz is love. 144hz is life. I like to submit unfinished posts then do about 20 edits. I like the Night Theme too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

I think it's good.

Means ISPs can't charge unreal amounts for priority service (That's what I understand it is).

 

I agree with this.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I pay for data, they pay for data, we all pay for data. where the data comes from and where it goes should have no bearing on the cost. companies having to pay an extra "protection" so that the data makes it to it's destination safely just sounds like a bunch of gangs bullying people who wander into their territory, and that's not how the internet should work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Net neutrality is good, it's bs if ISPs can cut down the bandwidth for certain services just because the services aren't paying them anything.

Specs: CPU - Intel i7 8700K @ 5GHz | GPU - Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 Gaming | Motherboard - ASUS Strix Z370-G WIFI AC | RAM - XPG Gammix DDR4-3000MHz 32GB (2x16GB) | Main Drive - Samsung 850 Evo 500GB M.2 | Other Drives - 7TB/3 Drives | CPU Cooler - Corsair H100i Pro | Case - Fractal Design Define C Mini TG | Power Supply - EVGA G3 850W

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

What the hell was your friends argument against Net Neutrality?

Net Neutrality is good!

He was like, "If you want faster internet you pay for it, why isn't it the same for big companies supplying information." The thing is they are already paying for their speed, and if they need to pay for more "because they use a lot of bandwidth" that's just stupid. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

From what I've heard, net neutrality would mean all data has to be treated equally.  As in, ISP's would not be allowed to give priority to some traffic and throttle other traffic, based on whatever they feel like (probably how much that other company paid them).  This makes sense, since I don't expect my water supply to be cut off if the city thinks I'm doing something unimportant with it, and internet access is no different.

Solve your own audio issues  |  First Steps with RPi 3  |  Humidity & Condensation  |  Sleep & Hibernation  |  Overclocking RAM  |  Making Backups  |  Displays  |  4K / 8K / 16K / etc.  |  Do I need 80+ Platinum?

If you can read this you're using the wrong theme.  You can change it at the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

WHY IS IT BAD?

SLOW INTERNET IS GOOD???

OFF TOPIC: I suggest every poll from now on to have "**CK EA" option instead of "Other"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

ALL internet speed should be equal.

ISPs should give everyone the same bandwidth to everyone, but and you pay for the data.

But sadly that isn't how the world turns!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Also what is your guys view on data caps?

I can understand ISPs not wanting to run the show like an all you can eat buffet, where one monthly fee gets you potentially petabytes of bandwidth, so with the current model of flat monthly rate and a data cap, I guess it makes sense.  That's not to say though that I like it at all; I don't :)

 

I could see them switching to a "pay as you go" system where you are charged like a few cents per gigabyte or something like that (and of course this would also scale up with higher speed plans).

Solve your own audio issues  |  First Steps with RPi 3  |  Humidity & Condensation  |  Sleep & Hibernation  |  Overclocking RAM  |  Making Backups  |  Displays  |  4K / 8K / 16K / etc.  |  Do I need 80+ Platinum?

If you can read this you're using the wrong theme.  You can change it at the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

I can understand ISPs not wanting to run the show like an all you can eat buffet, where one monthly fee gets you potentially petabytes of bandwidth, so with the current model of flat monthly rate and a data cap, I guess it makes sense.  That's not to say though that I like it at all; I don't :)

 

I could see them switching to a "pay as you go" system where you are charged like a few cents per gigabyte or something like that (and of course this would also scale up with higher speed plans).

So you would pay more per gigabyte if you had faster speeds?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

So you would pay more per gigabyte if you had faster speeds?

Of course, that's how it works now and always will.  Don't confuse this with the data prioritization and throttling crap of not having net neutrality though

Solve your own audio issues  |  First Steps with RPi 3  |  Humidity & Condensation  |  Sleep & Hibernation  |  Overclocking RAM  |  Making Backups  |  Displays  |  4K / 8K / 16K / etc.  |  Do I need 80+ Platinum?

If you can read this you're using the wrong theme.  You can change it at the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

My friend and I were having a conversation on why Net-Neutrality is good/bad. He has the argument that it is bad, but I think that it is good. Whats your opinion on this, and how would it effect you / the provider?

 

I think that it is good because it equal and better for everyone. I think it should be a thing because without it, the ISP's are just lining their pockets with money that they don't need. 

 

 

Its good ISP have lots of money and should not make people charge to get bandwith.

Good luck, Have fun, Build PC, and have a last gen console for use once a year. I should answer most of the time between 9 to 3 PST

NightHawk 3.0: R7 5700x @, B550A vision D, H105, 2x32gb Oloy 3600, Sapphire RX 6700XT  Nitro+, Corsair RM750X, 500 gb 850 evo, 2tb rocket and 5tb Toshiba x300, 2x 6TB WD Black W10 all in a 750D airflow.
GF PC: (nighthawk 2.0): R7 2700x, B450m vision D, 4x8gb Geli 2933, Strix GTX970, CX650M RGB, Obsidian 350D

Skunkworks: R5 3500U, 16gb, 500gb Adata XPG 6000 lite, Vega 8. HP probook G455R G6 Ubuntu 20. LTS

Condor (MC server): 6600K, z170m plus, 16gb corsair vengeance LPX, samsung 750 evo, EVGA BR 450.

Spirt  (NAS) ASUS Z9PR-D12, 2x E5 2620V2, 8x4gb, 24 3tb HDD. F80 800gb cache, trueNAS, 2x12disk raid Z3 stripped

PSU Tier List      Motherboard Tier List     SSD Tier List     How to get PC parts cheap    HP probook 445R G6 review

 

"Stupidity is like trying to find a limit of a constant. You are never truly smart in something, just less stupid."

Camera Gear: X-S10, 16-80 F4, 60D, 24-105 F4, 50mm F1.4, Helios44-m, 2 Cos-11D lavs

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Also what is your guys view on data caps?

ISPs being shills

Someone told Luke and Linus at CES 2017 to "Unban the legend known as Jerakl" and that's about all I've got going for me. (It didn't work)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

People should be more concerned about about pathetic speeds and ridiculously overpriced plans.

^ I couldn't state this better.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

How could it possibly be bad...

Without net neutrality, ISPs the world over could start demanding money from internet businesses to give them "priority access"(fast lane) or risk being shoved in the Slow Lane. Can you imagine how costly that'd be?
During the whole Net Neutrality debacle, ISPs wanted the fast lanes, all the while claiming that the rest of the internet wouldn't be "affected", that it would still be getting the same speeds that it is now, just that some website would have faster speeds than others...

Then we see what happened with Netflix, at first, all was well, netflix was able to provide high speed streaming videos to everybody, but then the ISPs decided to get greedy and shoved Netflix into a "slow lane", essentially killing the service for anyone on these ISPs. They then demanded Netflix to pay up or stay in the slow lane, which would harm their business. It's basically extortion at that point. And of course, the moment netflix started paying, suddenly speeds were right back up like magic.

 

So really, if you wanted to make the "next big thing" on the internet, like the next Facebook or Netflix, you wouldn't have been able to had Net Neutrality failed, because you wouldn't have been able to pay up the big man in the middle who would deliberately put your service into a slow lane.

CPU: AMD Ryzen 3700x / GPU: Asus Radeon RX 6750XT OC 12GB / RAM: Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8GB DDR4-3200
MOBO: MSI B450m Gaming Plus / NVME: Corsair MP510 240GB / Case: TT Core v21 / PSU: Seasonic 750W / OS: Win 10 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I can understand ISPs not wanting to run the show like an all you can eat buffet

 

I can't. It's not like they only have a limited amount of data so they have to make sure there's enough left for everyone or something like that. Data is digital, it can be generated infinitely, all the ISP does is transmit whatever is requested. There's no logical reason there should be a maximum. People wouldn't "hog the bandwidth" because they can only use whatever data rate they pay for. And if the ISP can't provide the data rate they're paying for, then what they hell are they doing selling that service in the first place. If too many people are buying high speed plans and their network can't handle it, well those high-speed plans are more expensive than low-speed plans. Where the hell is all that extra money going? Isn't the entire point of paying for something to provide the funding necessary to provide the thing you're paying for?

 

Data caps and anti-net-neutrality campaigns are nothing more than ISPs refusing to spend the money they charge for their services on actually providing the service, instead just pocketing the money and throwing their hands in the air, "Our network just can't handle it (because we refuse to use the money it generates to upgrade it) and it's everyone's fault for actually using their internet! I mean look at these people over here, they're paying for a 100 megabit connection AND THEY'RE USING ALL 100 MEGS OF IT, HOW DARE THEY!!"

Forum Rules   |   Guide to Display Cables / Adapters

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Its 40/60 good and bad.

40 good that better oversight of the ISP's is there.

60 bad that it allows Government restriction and impediment especially with FCC control which has never good anyhow.

Also the ruling on the issue is quite unlawful so it makes this bad anyhow. The FCC did not (does not) have the authority (lawfully) to give itself the power/oversight of internet things. This matter was not approved of by Congress and the power to grant increased power to its self was never given by congress so the FCC has overreached its authority in this matter.

 

And there is more I could go into but I leave it there....

COMMUNITY STANDARDS   |   TECH NEWS POSTING GUIDELINES   |   FORUM STAFF

LTT Folding Users Tips, Tricks and FAQ   |   F@H & BOINC Badge Request   |   F@H Contribution   |   My Rig   |   Project Steamroller

I am a Moderator, but I am fallible. Discuss or debate with me as you will but please do not argue with me as that will get us nowhere.

 

Spoiler

† † †

 

Character is like a Tree and Reputation like its Shadow. The Shadow is what we think of it; The Tree is the Real thing.  ~ Abraham Lincoln

Reputation is a Lifetime to create but seconds to destroy.

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.  ~ Winston Churchill

Docendo discimus - "to teach is to learn"

 

† CHRISTIAN MEMBER †

 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing General Discussion

×