Jump to content

Is Net-Neutrality bad?

Penny5837
By Penny5837
in General Discussion
 Share
Posted
  • Author

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....

If you want to show why it is bad, feel free to, I'd like to know the other side of the argument.

 

 

 

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

If you want to show why it is bad, feel free to, I'd like to know the other side of the argument.

Just did...

 

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.

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
Posted

Well more.

 

OK specifically what do you need me to explain?

If you want me to post the limitations of the FCC that will take me a little time to find and post.

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
Posted
  • Author

OK specifically what do you need me to explain?

If you want me to post the limitations of the FCC that will take me a little time to find and post.

Eh don't worry about it. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

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!!"

I know its not like they only have so much data or something like that. I just think its a bit weird for someone who uses 2 GB per month to pay the same as someone who uses 2 TB per month (assuming they get the same speed). And regardless, I can totally see ISPs seeing it that way, but maybe someone can convince me why usage shouldn't affect the price  :rolleyes:

 

Let me explain a bit more.  I see it like this.  Their network has a certain maximum speed, which means that given a certain period of time (say, a month) there is a maximum amount of data they can transfer (so in a way, they actually to sort of have a limit).  Sure they don't need to set caps to make sure there is enough "left over" for everyone, but for any amount of data used by any one person, that's a certain percent of the total they can physically do that month, and so I would understand them being charged proportionally.

Edited by Ryan_Vickers

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

Eh don't worry about it. 

Well umm OK...

You do know that the FCC is an entity of government and not part of the law making branch so it cannot pass net neutrality on its own (which it did) and by doing so it essentially granted itself more power without the consent of Congress which is the only Branch that can grant said power to the FCC. Any first year Constitutional lawyer can tell you this, which I happen to know 2 personally.

Congress should have stepped in but with all the BS going on it wasn't gonna happen.

If that's not what you were asking let me know.

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
Posted
  • Author

I know its not like they only have so much data or something like that. I just think its a bit weird for someone who uses 2 GB per month to pay the same as someone who uses 2 TB per month (assuming they get the same speed). And regardless, I can totally see ISPs seeing it that way, but maybe someone can convince me why usage shouldn't affect the price  :rolleyes:

I think if you use less, it should cost less, but if you go over a certain limit the price shouldn't keep increasing.

 

 

 

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

I know its not like they only have so much data or something like that. I just think its a bit weird for someone who uses 2 GB per month to pay the same as someone who uses 2 TB per month (assuming they get the same speed). And regardless, I can totally see ISPs seeing it that way, but maybe someone can convince me why usage shouldn't affect the price  :rolleyes:

 

I will.

Its like water or electricity. You pay a utility to produce something and you pay for it.

Internet is the opposite, ISP's are not producing anything just maintaining a network (albeit nation/worldwide) you should not have to pay for data as data is not being produced just made available. In fact by this logic the ISP should be paying those that do produce the data. And the consumer should be credited with the data they back over the net as they are producing Data and sending back, being restricted with up load speed is a way of hindering that. Such logic...

*edit

Also ISP's are not a Utility they are more of a maintenance group. So Net neutrality making ISP's a utility is frivolous.

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
Posted

That is a really cool idea.

If you think about ISPs are the only ones that dont do it.

Electrical companies have to pay out to those that contribute to the grid. ;)

*edit to add

So yeah now that they are utilities do we get a kick back now since we send out data? The ISP is a utility now so as the FCC dipshits said it "It should a utility so equal treatment can be applied" ... wow the things I am coming up with here..... :ph34r: I just blew my own mind.  :o

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
Posted (edited)

I will.

Its like water or electricity. You pay a utility to produce something and you pay for it.

Internet is the opposite, ISP's are not producing anything just maintaining a network (albeit nation/worldwide) you should not have to pay for data as data is not being produced just made available. In fact by this logic the ISP should be paying those that do produce the data. And the consumer should be credited with the data they back over the net as they are producing Data and sending back, being restricted with up load speed is a way of hindering that. Such logic...

*edit

Also ISP's are not a Utility they are more of a maintenance group. So Net neutrality making ISP's a utility is frivolous.

I know they're not "producing" data :)

Well, if they make more available to you, shouldn't that cost more?  I'm struggling to find a good comparison now though...

I guess it would be like if a company only owned power lines. How would that work? Like an ISP I guess :)

Omg epiphany :P they would charge consumers for the power, but would in turn pay producers for it since without them creating the product, there would be no demand for transmission. This means isps should pay websites based on how much they are used (sort of what you said I guess, it just took a while to really think about how that would work and the logic behind it)

Edited by Ryan_Vickers

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

If you think about ISPs are the only ones that dont do it.

Electrical companies have to pay out to those that contribute to the grid. ;)

Too true.

 

 

 

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

I know they're not "producing" data :)

Well, if they make more available to you, shouldn't that cost more?  I'm struggling to find a good comparison now though...

I guess it would be like if a company only owned power lines. How would that work? Like an ISP I guess :)

 

Heres the thing, ISP's charge you for something that they cannot control. Putting a cap on something like data that they don't produce does nothing to their systems only the system itself limits you e.g. your download speed. For an ISP to charge you for a product they don't themselves pay for is fraudulent in a way. They are putting a price on something that doesn't technically exist physically as well. Crap this discussion can deep fast.....

They are really only charging (or supposed to) for maintaining physical assets.

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
Posted

Here the thing, ISP's charge you for something that they cannot control. Putting a cap on something like data that they don't produce does nothing to their systems only the system itself limits you e.g. your download speed. For an ISP to charge you for a product they don't themselves pay for is fraudulent in a way. They are putting a price on something that doesn't technically exist physically as well. Crap this discussion can deep fast.....

Yeah, OK I think I'm seeing this differently now. Thanks :D

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'm really enjoying this topic, thanks for all the replies guys!

 

 

 

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

That's like saying that strong encryption is bad and we need backdoors so that the government can see everything

 

*uhm*uk*uhm*

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

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!!"

*clap* *clap* *clap*

 

If I'm paying for 10Mbps connection I should be able to utilize my connection 24/7 without extra charges or "caps". If they can't provide 10Mbps 24/7 then they should not offer that plan. Obviously maintence can and will happen, but that is besides the point.

 

It's just like what just happened with OneDrive, "unlimited" storage and then they get pissy when someone actually uses it as they advertised it. If you can't provide X service then don't offer it in the first place!

 

And it's not like they're biting off more than they can chew, they have the backend to offer higher capacity unlimited plans, but they don't until some actual competition shows up. There's literally AT&T fiber lines running right outside my house and throughout my city, but for some reason I can only get 75d/8u and they don't offer their Gigapower service because the only "competition" here is Charter! Also Gigapower is somehow available everywhere Google Fiber is available/coming and Comcast can offer 2Gbps like it's no big deal.

 

Really wish the NN/TitleII ruling effected last mile connections, would have really spiced things up.

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

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!!"

I had an experience the other day that actually gave me some liking back into Comcast (taboo right?). Whenever their network can support more speed they provide the extra bandwidth to you. I pay for 150/20 but I usually get closer to 180/30. It a nice concept, but not worth dealing with Comcast for.

 

 

 

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

It's good because ISP's 

Have proved they are evil and lack ethics 

IntelCorei54670k,Maximus VI Formula,Swift tech H220, 16gigs Corsair Dominator platinums, Asus DCUII GTX 780,1x256 840 evo, 1x 2TB Segate barracuda, Corsair AX 860, 

3 X Noctua NF-F12, 2x Noctua NF A-14, Ducky Shine 3 Blue Leds Blue switches, Razer Death Adder 2012, Corsair vengence 1400  

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

Comcast can offer 2Gbps like it's no big deal.

Yeah but its like $300 a month. And even then you'd need to be in a business area to get it. Also you'd need to have a 10 gig network to actually transmit all the data.

 

 

 

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

It's good because ISP's

Have proved they are evil and lack ethics

Always lining the pockets of congressman who don't give a shit about them.

 

 

 

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

That's like saying that strong encryption is bad and we need backdoors so that the government can see everything

 

*uhm*uk*uhm*

 

Who are you replying to?

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
Posted

net neutrality is BAD.  i like paying more for outdated services. come on who doesnt.

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

net neutrality is BAD. i like paying more for outdated services. come on who doesnt.

Lol

 

 

 

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

×