Net Neutrality is Dead.

[Brooksie359]

1 hour ago, Eibe said:

Maybe some of them, but a fully corrupted class of politicians would be an overstatement .

I am merely stating that it could be other reasons than ignorance. I would also like to state that there are politicians who get it. that is why the vote to reverse the repeal passed in the senate. also politicians didn't repeal net neutrality it was the fcc.

 

1 hour ago, RorzNZ said:

I mean, don't Google and FaceBook collect our data anyway? Pretty much everything on the internet is out there for people to hack or see or whatnot. Just remember whatever you put on the internet is out there forever.

them collecting data is the least of our worries tbh.

[Nocte]

2 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I am merely stating that it could be other reasons than ignorance. I would also like to state that there are politicians who get it. that is why the vote to reverse the repeal passed in the senate. also politicians didn't repeal net neutrality it was the fcc.

Yeah definitely, I am not saying that there are politicians who do not. 

 

Also, it is true that cable companies did not get their fair share of compensation as they provided the infrastructure for businesses that operated over it (over the top businesses) and that might be why some of them (FCC included) would repeal it. 

 

However, due to the reasons I stated above I believe that the internet has become such an important GPT that we (or you, since I'm not from the US) cannot afford to change it now. 

 

But then again, this subject is all about opinions and everyone's may vary. I firmly believe that for the current society at large net neutrality is not helpful. 

[Brooksie359]

1 minute ago, Eibe said:

Yeah definitely, I am not saying that there are politicians who do not. 

 

Also, it is true that cable companies did not get their fair share of compensation as they provided the infrastructure for businesses that operated over it (over the top businesses) and that might be why some of them (FCC included) would repeal it. 

 

However, due to the reasons I stated above I believe that the internet has become such an important GPT that we (or you, since I'm not from the US) cannot afford to change it now. 

 

But then again, this subject is all about opinions and everyone's may vary. I firmly believe that for the current society at large net neutrality is not helpful. 

they got a ton of money for infrastructure so I would disagree. not only that but the government gave them the ability to run the cables where they needed to so to say that they didn't get compensated well enough is just ridiculous. 

[Nocte]

9 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

they got a ton of money for infrastructure so I would disagree. not only that but the government gave them the ability to run the cables where they needed to so to say that they didn't get compensated well enough is just ridiculous. 

This is getting a bit off-topic now so I will hide it. 

Spoiler

 

Well, from their eyes they did not, otherwise they wouldn't even think about all of this. 

 

They provided an infrastructure that allowed businesses to be created on top of it and they charged for access to the infrastructure no matter the usage (or well, in Europe at least... I think that in the US not all home plans are unlimited?). 

 

If you want to continue discussint about this feel free to PM me so that we do not go OT.

 

 

[mr moose]

52 minutes ago, Eibe said:

They developed and maintain  the infrastructure, not its applications and uses. All the platforms (software) that most of the modern civilisations are using are developed and maintained by young people (e.g. Zuckerberg with Facebook). 

Old people develop in all areas of technology.   This concept you have that only young people developed and maintain today's tech  is wrong. Software development is only one part of the picture.  

 

52 minutes ago, Eibe said:

They grew up with the cable companies and it makes sens that they support them, just as most of the youngsters favour a netural internet.

They also set the groundwork for the internet as we know it, paved the way for technology to be developed that uses it.

52 minutes ago, Eibe said:

I don't want to sound self-entitled here, but this is quite a big statement. Sure most of them know more about its implications than the average person. 

As pointed out before, ironically it's exactly what you claimed, you decided that age and current job were indicators of ignorance for any one specific technology.

52 minutes ago, Eibe said:

But there are people who study subjects around it and its implications for society and the economy. You do not need to be a politician to study the subject. 

No one said you do.

52 minutes ago, Eibe said:

I am quite sure that I have a firm grasp of the internet implications in society, both from an economic point-of-view, its correlation with social power and digital divides it may create across the society (too many underestimate the relationship between communication and power - a good read for this, although a bit academic and intensive, is Communication Power by Castells). 

I never said you didn't understand the internet, I pointed out that you cannot assume someone else is more ignorant than you.  For all you know they are experts in the field. You have no evidence they are ignorant.

52 minutes ago, Eibe said:

Calling out someone and saying that they are just a user and they do not understand it is a bit of a prejudice. 

Then don't do it. 

[Taf the Ghost]

13 minutes ago, Eibe said:

Maybe some of them, but a fully corrupted class of politicians would be an overstatement .

Not really. That's the end-around of representative governments. Capture the politicians when they get elected, and make sure only the captured ones can ever rise to prominence.

 

Then just hope well-coiffed Wrecking Ball doesn't show up.

 

All representative governments now have this problem. It was the "solution" to people having a say in their own governance by factional leaders, going back about 100 years. They've made it an art form. It  gets really ugly when you realize the more "dirty laundry" someone has, the more they're pushed into high politics. Then they just play Divide & Conquer. 

 

NN is a factional fight between Google/Netflix & Comcast/Verizon. It's never been anything else, which I why I feel Google is mostly the one to blame for the current state of things. They had massive influence during the Obama Administration and could have easily gotten something directly pushed through. (Google has massive lobbying spending in DC.) Because of the court cases, all they did was push something through the FCC, then they ran a really stupid propaganda campaign. 

 

Previously, I'd have said it quite surprised me how foolish Google was in this. Now, having gotten too good of a look at Google's actual business practices, this is par for their course. Google is a massive revenue, 2-product company that can't do anything else very well. That makes really stupid mistakes constantly.

[Nocte]

32 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Old people develop in all areas of technology.   This concept you have that only young people developed and maintain today's tech  is wrong. Software development is only one part of the picture.  

You just quoted me saying that old people maintain the tech infrastructure being used? It's obviously not all of them do one thing, and all the others do something else, it's most and most. You also have to distinguish between radical and incremental innovations.

32 minutes ago, mr moose said:

They also set the groundwork for the internet as we know it, paved the way for technology to be developed that uses it.

I said this in the paragraph you quoted before?

32 minutes ago, mr moose said:

As pointed out before, ironically it's exactly what you claimed, you decided that age and current job were indicators of ignorance for any one specific technology.

That argument developed quite a bit after that post. Also, my statement was that this is what happens when "old politicians who do not understand ...". I never said that because they are old and because they are politicians they do not understand technological trends or that all old politicians do not understand it- it literally/grammatically does not mean that.  Furthermore, it was a provocative pun also in regard to the show that was put up in the talks with Zuckerberg about Cambridge Analytica.

 

I am fine discussing that statement, but do not try to add some extra meaning to what I wrote to support your argument better. 

32 minutes ago, mr moose said:

No one said you do.

In your post you said "these politicians have a better understanding of the internet and it's implications in society than you do". 

32 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Then don't do it.

But these are two different scenarios aren't they? We can see and read that some of them are ignorant about it or, at least, made statements that look like it. 

While you have no idea what a forum user knows about the subject and hasn't expressed themselves about it. 

Edited June 14, 2018 by Eibe

[Brooksie359]

38 minutes ago, Eibe said:

This is getting a bit off-topic now so I will hide it. 

  Hide contents

 

Well, from their eyes they did not, otherwise they wouldn't even think about all of this. 

 

They provided an infrastructure that allowed businesses to be created on top of it and they charged for access to the infrastructure no matter the usage (or well, in Europe at least... I think that in the US not all home plans are unlimited?). 

 

If you want to continue discussint about this feel free to PM me so that we do not go OT.

 

 

the us government payed the isps money for them to create the infrastructure. they need not take the deal if they thought it wasn't enough and by all accounts it was quite enough. this is how this mess all started so I would say its not off topic at all. the government sponsored the creation of infrastructure required for isps much like they do with utility companies and as such they were being regulated as one under net neutrality. 

[BuckGup]

I wanna see some massive cyber warfare against ISPs

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, Eibe said:

You just quoted me saying that old people maintain the tech infrastructure being used? It's obviously not all of them do one thing, and all the others do something else, it's most and most. You also have to distinguish between radical and incremental innovations.

I don't have to distinguish anything, you said most of the old politicians are ignorant and dominate politics, I corrected you showing how being old has nothing to do with it and how being a politician has nothing to do with it.  Now you are trying to argue something different.  Neither being a politician nor being old is a precursor to being ignorant.

Given that these politicians you speak of gave the ISP's vast sums of money to build up internet infrastructure and you argue they have nothing to do with it indicates the ignorance is more in those who do not educate themselves about the topic before posting.

2 hours ago, Eibe said:

 I never said that because they are old and because they are politicians they do not understand technological trends or that all old politicians do not understand it-

 

Yes you did:

 

15 hours ago, Eibe said:

When most of the world political class is dominated by old people who do not understand the technological trends of the present, we cannot do much about it.

Pretty much only one way to interoperate that.

 

2 hours ago, Eibe said:

I am fine discussing that statement, but do not try to add some extra meaning to what I wrote to support your argument better. 

I didbn't add anything.

2 hours ago, Eibe said:

In your post you said "these politicians have a better understanding of the internet and it's implications in society than you do". 

 

Do not snip out part of my sentence and claim it means something different.  That sentence clearly starts with "for all you know",   which means that sentence stands true as you cannot know whether the people you accuse of being ignorant actually are or not.

 

2 hours ago, Eibe said:

 

 

While you have no idea what a forum user knows about the subject and hasn't expressed themselves about it. 

Which is why I said "for all you know",  It's very hypocritical of you to call others ignorant without any real knowledge of them,  and then get upset when you think someone is doing it to you.

 

[LoganTNZ]

This subject is getting so old are repetitive now. Nothings happened so far, and nothing is going to happen.

 

Chill out. And if something does happen, everyone knows the internet will explode into a shit storm. Even ISPs know this, thry aren't a bunch of sociopathic idiots, why would they risk losing so much?

 

Its all a bunch of what ifs with no solid reasoning. Sure, im able to go around stabbing people because i have access to a knife, but is it in my best interests?

[Brooksie359]

39 minutes ago, LoganTNZ said:

This subject is getting so old are repetitive now. Nothings happened so far, and nothing is going to happen.

 

Chill out. And if something does happen, everyone knows the internet will explode into a shit storm. Even ISPs know this, thry aren't a bunch of sociopathic idiots, why would they risk losing so much?

 

Its all a bunch of what ifs with no solid reasoning. Sure, im able to go around stabbing people because i have access to a knife, but is it in my best interests?

Well seeing as they had blackmailed both Netflix and riot games into paying them to not throttle people acesssing their services I would say that's pretty damn solid reasoning to think they will abuse the fact that it's totally legal to do that now. 

[Lurick]

6 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Well seeing as they had blackmailed both Netflix and riot games into paying them to not throttle people acesssing their services I would say that's pretty damn solid reasoning to think they will abuse the fact that it's totally legal to do that now. 

They aren't going to do it overnight though. It's going to be slowly eroded away and brought back to be 'the norm'. They'll wait a bit for things to calm down and then slowly introduce stuff to throttle services.

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, Lurick said:

They aren't going to do it overnight though. It's going to be slowly eroded away and brought back to be 'the norm'. They'll wait a bit for things to calm down and then slowly introduce stuff to throttle services.

Yeah they will likely be smart about it but they will still end up black mailing large companies once again. 

[mynameisjuan]

14 hours ago, BuckGup said:

I wanna see some massive cyber warfare against ISPs

Yeah lets fuck over the ISPs equipment so it messes with 10,000s of customer connections!

 

What a great idea.

[BuckGup]

7 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Yeah lets fuck over the ISPs equipment so it messes with 10,000s of customer connections!

 

What a great idea.

Yeah they will screw you harder then temporarily not having internet 

[mynameisjuan]

3 minutes ago, BuckGup said:

Yeah they will screw you harder then temporarily not having internet 

Sure they will with all this havoc currently going down. So lets fuck with them so consumers cant use it and businesses cannot take payments!

 

Such a good idea!

[DrMacintosh]

This is when the West gets to flex it’s “States Rights” muscles ? 

 

Many states are beginning to implement their own laws, my state included. While Net-Neitrality being dead is bad, there are many states willing and actively fighting for it. Many of those efforts will successfully pass in their respective states. 

[alicskysareblue]

this is an exaggeration, several states have already taken up net nutrality rules which while the fcc will likely try to appeal will probably go to court on

[LoganTNZ]

7 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

Well seeing as they had blackmailed both Netflix and riot games into paying them to not throttle people acesssing their services I would say that's pretty damn solid reasoning to think they will abuse the fact that it's totally legal to do that now. 

Wasnt that in, like, 2011? Times have changed since then. The internet didnt care about much, now the internet gets blown up about the most minor stuff lmao (not referencing net neutrality)

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, LoganTNZ said:

Wasnt that in, like, 2011? Times have changed since then. The internet didnt care about much, now the internet gets blown up about the most minor stuff lmao (not referencing net neutrality)

2014, and while the issue is a little bit more complicated than just a throttling, the reality is there is no transparency and the consumer is the one losing out all the time, they are paying for Internet access and they are paying for streaming content, then in some cases they are being asked to pay again to have their streaming service delivered over the internet service they already pay for.

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, LoganTNZ said:

Wasnt that in, like, 2011? Times have changed since then. The internet didnt care about much, now the internet gets blown up about the most minor stuff lmao (not referencing net neutrality)

The internet can only blow up about those types of thing if they know about it. Back then nobody new it was happening otherwise the internet would have blown up about it. The reason 8th e internet is blowing up now is because everyone knows that this makes those practices legal and there would be basically nothing we could do to stop them from doing it again. I mean if they do it out right with everyone knowing what could we do to stop it? We would have to try and get regulations to stop it in which case we would basically have to reinstate net neutrality. The entire point is all this could be avoided if it wasn't repealed. 

[Trik'Stari]

On 6/13/2018 at 9:59 AM, SansVarnic said:

I said this from the very beginning. And I stick with it.

Net Neutrality was a ploy by the FCC, a politically based and motivated move with no real merritt or positive gain for consumers.

Though I have debated this many times in and out of the forum it still stands as true.

 

 

As it is, Please remember to keep this conversation as political neutral as possible or this thread will be locked.

I hadn't considered that.

 

The scary thing is that if true, it will work. The party supporting the downfall of Net Neutrality will lose the next election, and the party that supports it will win.

 

And yet my internet connection won't improve, and the tax dollars I pay that go to the ISP's will be pocketed and nothing ever delivered....

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

 I mean if they do it out right with everyone knowing what could we do to stop it?

Nothing, just like all those senators and congressmen taking donations from oil companies, industry groups and lobby groups who, coincidentally, also get favorable laws passed.   It's hard enough stopping an illegal practice without trying to stop a legal one with soooo much money behind it.

[Taf the Ghost]

4 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

I hadn't considered that.

 

The scary thing is that if true, it will work. The party supporting the downfall of Net Neutrality will lose the next election, and the party that supports it will win.

 

And yet my internet connection won't improve, and the tax dollars I pay that go to the ISP's will be pocketed and nothing ever delivered....

Welcome to a double-layered Divide & Conquer Strategy. Only works if the media is complicit, though.

 

So, who owns the Media?