Where has lack of net neutrality taken us? (right forum this time)

[DocSwag]

5 minutes ago, pinksnowbirdie said:

Treating ISPs like utilities stifles competition.

 

How many choices of electric and gas companies do you have?
Only one?
How many choices do you have for telephone companies aside from like AT&T/Verizon/T-Mobile/Sprint?

Only a couple?

How? How does that stifle it? Correlation =/= causation. Treating them like utilities does not mean there's only one choice.

[handymanshandle]

1 minute ago, DocSwag said:

How? How does that stifle it? Correlation =/= causation. Treating them like utilities does not mean there's only one choice.

Yeee

 

 

With gas and electricity you generally only have one choice that you're stuck with.

Telephone, especially cellular things get a little better. But not much

[Fasauceome]

28 minutes ago, pinksnowbirdie said:

You're misconstruing what I'm saying.

 

I was worried what implications NN could have if it would've been enforced.

 

You all are fear mongering that without Net Neutrality we'd head into some dystopian future where competition would be stifled DESPITE our existing anti-trust laws. 

THIS exactly

 

20 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Muh free market

 

22 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

You purposely have you head in the sand.

1. NN is not new, classification was just changed
2. Evidence has already been provided to you of things ISPs were doing that prompted them to be classified as title 2 and all you opponents are just going "la la la la la, i can't hear you"

No more political debate in the thread. Relevant links and info only. Please keep it objective and civil

[ivan134]

Just now, pinksnowbirdie said:

Well if anti-trust laws were enforced, I'm sure we would've seen more competition.

 

But you realize, it's expensive to build that infrastructure. That's going to be a huge barrier to entry for any startup would be the cost to build infrastructure.

They got govt subsidies to build that infrastructure, so essentially, tax payers paid for them. Publicized cost, privatized profits.

 

Nice self defeating comment. How would competition come about if they only have access to the infrastucture?

 

Why does an ISP need to be able to block access to sites and apps to be able to bring you the best price?

 

You really don't know what reclassification to title 2 was about. You've been projecting that everyone else is fear-mongering, when all you've done is regurgitate talking points from fear-mongering conservative sites.

[handymanshandle]

2 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

 

 

No more political debate in the thread. Relevant links and info only. Please keep it objective and civil

2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

You really don't know what reclassification to title 2 was about. You've been projecting that everyone else is fear-mongering, when all you've done is regurgitate talking points from fear-mongering conservative sites.

 

 

[ivan134]

3 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

 

 

No more political debate in the thread. Relevant links and info only. Please keep it objective and civil

That second comment wasn't political. Also, it's impossible to discuss this without being political. Proponents have facts and evidence, while opponents are just repeating talking points from conservative pundits.

[Fasauceome]

Just now, ivan134 said:

That second comment wasn't political. Also, it's impossible to discuss this without being political. Proponents have facts and evidence, while opponents are just repeating talking points from conservative pundits.

I just wanted to have articles relating to current day effects of the repeal. I knew some political talk was inevitable, like the Australia conversation that occurred, but I'll have to request no further discussion about the political side of things, as the debate has carried over multiple pages, and that discussion isn't appropriate for the forum.

[lewdicrous]

Hey there, an outsider here again.

As stated before in the thread, NN isn't something new, something similar to it was passed in 1934 (Communications Act), but there were other regulation that came after it (Telecommunications Act of 1996 and Open Internet Order of 2010 are among those)

These things have been in place for the past 80+ years, they've just been updated to suit the changes that occurred over said years.

 

You can't just ignore the original Communications act and just focus on NN itself, to add to that, you can't just look at the repeal of NN and say nothing positive/negative has happened when it's been less than a year since it took place.

 

I ask you this, how does this promote competition?

Spoiler

 

I'll also throw this bone out for anyone to catch, doesn't it seem suspicious that someone who used to work for a telecommunications company was the one to repeal said laws/regulations? I don't know if "conflict of interest" rings any bells.

 

One can't look at a burning tree and call it Christmas, additionally, you can't just look at a pile of shit and call it chocolate. There are many sides to this issue and you can't take the word of one person or one organization as Gospel.

There's an obvious bias coming from all around you, so you can't just put on "tunnel vision googles" and believe just one side of the story.

 

 

EDIT: Here are some articles talking about how ISPs throttled YouTube and Netflix (among other streaming companies)

Spoiler

https://gizmodo.com/it-sure-looks-like-wireless-carriers-got-busted-throttl-1828823399

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-04/youtube-and-netflix-throttled-by-carriers-research-finds

https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/4/17820508/netflix-youtube-throttled-att-verizon-t-mobile-net-neutrality-violations

https://marketingland.com/study-telecoms-have-been-throttling-youtube-and-netflix-since-demise-of-net-neutrality-247346

https://www.slashgear.com/us-carriers-allegedly-throttling-youtube-netflix-streaming-04544424/

Here's some dessert, if you're still hungry

Spoiler

https://www.popsci.com/net-neutrality-lies

 

[DocSwag]

9 minutes ago, pinksnowbirdie said:

Yeee

 

 

With gas and electricity you generally only have one choice that you're stuck with.

Telephone, especially cellular things get a little better. But not much

I still don't understand how NN rules stifle competition... My understanding is you're saying that utilities have no competition, thus saying that treating other things like utilities would get rid of competition. But all you've established is a correlation, not a causation...

[ivan134]

4 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

I just wanted to have articles relating to current day effects of the repeal. I knew some political talk was inevitable, like the Australia conversation that occurred, but I'll have to request no further discussion about the political side of things, as the debate has carried over multiple pages, and that discussion isn't appropriate for the forum.

Nothing so far that I know of, but obviously, they're not gonna do anything immediately, especially not when Ajit Pai is being investigated for lying about being DDOS'ed and other ridiculous things he's said, and the upcoming mid term elections that might flip congress (told you it's impossible to discuss this while excluding politics)

[ivan134]

5 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

I still don't understand how NN rules stifle competition... My understanding is you're saying that utilities have no competition, thus saying that treating other things like utilities would get rid of competition. But all you've established is a correlation, not a causation...

That's because it doesn't. He's talking out of his ass

 

https://www.freepress.net/news/press-releases/its-working-free-press-documents-historic-levels-investment-and-innovation-fccs

 

[Fasauceome]

13 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

That's because it doesn't. He's talking out of his ass

 

https://www.freepress.net/news/press-releases/its-working-free-press-documents-historic-levels-investment-and-innovation-fccs

 

Again, this is political debate. Not needed in this thread. It can't be that hard to see what material I'm looking to keep out.

 

[lewdicrous]

1 hour ago, pinksnowbirdie said:

Nice fear mongering

How was pre-2015 "dark ages"?

"Net Neutrality" has been a thing for years before that. Here's a paper from 2005:

Spoiler

https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=825123001111127068087079019030126002121019058093035031103094111005118003000023113091019024039057118017026015007090125097107051025071093050012094077031118115006007060048008106002120084108122000121119119088028008084004091112114127073017093002087086&EXT=pdf

It didn't just magically appear in 2015.

[handymanshandle]

2 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

Again, this is political debate. Not needed in this thread. It can't be that hard to see what material I'm looking to keep out.

 

Honestly, that guy is a jerk. I was just trying to make a point on how I feel about NN. I was reasonably asked to elaborate. Not really being in much of a mood to really go further than "this is how I think about the situation" but was sorta forced to because of the things him and a couple others were saying.

 

I was trying to express how a lot of the pro-nn stuff isn't represented properly and how people will paint a picture of there being "dark ages" and every bad thing will happen to the internet if NN was to be repealed. It's hard to find unbiased anti-NN stuff much like it's hard to find unbiased pro-NN stuff because it has become so partisan that it makes it difficult.

 

I will say this, I'm very much a fan of the free market and I think very few things should actually be regulated. "The freer the market, the freer the people"

 

Some things that I think maybe need more regulation though is Insurance, Banking and Healthcare.

[AngryBeaver]

The biggest problem here is that these big ISP's spend tons of money funding politicians which in turn help them push their agendas. Look at the Michael Cohen ordeal with ATT, Verizon, Comcast, etc. Then there is the fact they are able to spend millions of dollars annually to block small startup and municipal ISPs. These are companies that took massive billion dollar government grants to build out their infrastructure yet aren't required to share these same pathways with other companies?

 

In my area they have blocked a extremely good fiber company (10GBe for $249/m). They have basically halted their ability to expand across a park area and also across the river. These are areas that comcast either controls the poles or conduits and are blocking their access to them

[Fasauceome]

1 minute ago, AngryBeaver said:

The biggest problem here is that these big ISP's spend tons of money funding politicians which in turn help them push their agendas. Look at the Michael Cohen ordeal with ATT, Verizon, Comcast, etc. Then there is the fact they are able to spend millions of dollars annually to block small startup and municipal ISPs. These are companies that took massive billion dollar government grants to build out their infrastructure yet aren't required to share these same pathways with other companies?

 

In my area they have blocked a extremely good fiber company (10GBe for $249/m). They have basically halted their ability to expand across a park area and also across the river. These are areas that comcast either controls the poles or conduits and are blocking their access to them

any links to these current events?

[AngryBeaver]

Just now, fasauceome said:

any links to these current events?

No, because I am intentionally trying to keep where I live out of the equation.

 

I am sure you can do a quick google to see these types of activities happening all over the USA.

[Fasauceome]

4 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

No, because I am intentionally trying to keep where I live out of the equation.

 

I am sure you can do a quick google to see these types of activities happening all over the USA.

The reason I started this thread is because google yielded nothing but articles from 2017 about net neutrality.

[AngryBeaver]

4 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

The reason I started this thread is because google yielded nothing but articles from 2017 about net neutrality.

https://www.freepress.net/our-response/expert-analysis/explainers/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history

 

This is a interested read with where things started going to make the NN worth putting in place. If you look at the before and after you will see that a lot of those old violations are starting to come back in to play.

[Fasauceome]

2 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Tell me why you have to insult someone to attempt to prove a point?

I'm fine with disagreement; I encourage healthy arguments, if I were being honest. What I don't like is shouting someone down with insults and shouting someone down because of their political leanings. To me that tells me that you're focused on something that isn't the argument at hand so you can backhandedly win an argument you didn't make.

Please no more discussion of this nature, just the topic at hand. This thread is cluttered as it is.

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, fasauceome said:

Please no more discussion of this nature, just the topic at hand. This thread is cluttered as it is.

Alright, I'll respect it.

[TacoSenpai]

47 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

The biggest problem here is that these big ISP's spend tons of money funding politicians which in turn help them push their agendas. Look at the Michael Cohen ordeal with ATT, Verizon, Comcast, etc. Then there is the fact they are able to spend millions of dollars annually to block small startup and municipal ISPs. These are companies that took massive billion dollar government grants to build out their infrastructure yet aren't required to share these same pathways with other companies?

 

In my area they have blocked a extremely good fiber company (10GBe for $249/m). They have basically halted their ability to expand across a park area and also across the river. These are areas that comcast either controls the poles or conduits and are blocking their access to them

This to me gets more to the root of the problem. If we can solve this and enforce our anti-trust laws it benefits everyone. 

[Fasauceome]

1 minute ago, LordOTaco said:

This to me gets more to the root of the problem. If we can solve this and enforce our anti-trust laws it benefits everyone. 

Sure, but what about example of the ongoing effects of the repeal?

[AngryBeaver]

21 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

Sure, but what about example of the ongoing effects of the repeal?

Here is one example

 

Here is another: https://media.netflix.com/en/company-blog/the-misconception-about-internet-fast-lanes

 

Quote

It is at these points -- where our traffic enters an ISPs network -- where Netflix and others have been forced to pay Comcast, Verizon, AT&T and Time Warner access fees to reach our mutual customers. Without those payments, ISPs allowed these connection points to congest, resulting in a poor video streaming experience for Netflix users on those networks. While Netflix was able to meet the demand for payments, we continue to believe this practice stands in contrast to an open Internet and all its promise.

 

After we paid up, our traffic began moving at the same speed as everyone else not facing congestion. This is important, because this is where confusion often arises. Netflix and other content providers are not using fast lanes when they connect with an ISP’s last-mile networks. That is true in cases where we’ve had to make payments as well as when ISPs take advantage of Netflix’s Open Connect Content Delivery Network (CDN). Open Connect brings Netflix content to the location of an ISPs choice, usually at a common Internet exchange or through localized caches. It doesn’t prioritize the data Netflix users have requested. Rather it makes delivery of it more efficient for us and for the ISP.

This is where we are at again.

 

So the problem becomes that there is NOTHING in place to protect consumers once again. The FCC which was a body appointed for this purpose has now shifted their focus and are making it harder for the consumer to have any type of recourse and instead are actually protecting the large monopolies. Honestly, if that is the route they want to take then the large corporations should pay for them. We can then drop government funding and put more money back in to tax payer pockets so they can afford to pay for all these new fast lanes forced on us.

 

Also note this type of behavior hurts digital delivery companies. It also hurts any company that could potential incur these types of treatment. The ISP is basically asking for netflix to pay more or have their content delivery suffer. How is it fair for a company to pay for their own ISP and net service, then be forced to pay my service provider so I can access it optimally. This means they are double dipping, they are taking money from me for access to these services, then taking money from the services so I can actually access it properly. All while having a 97% profit margin on their broadband services.

 

Profit Margin source - https://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/time-warner-cables-97-pro_b_6591916.html

Truth be known this was in 2016, it has probably improved for them slightly in that time. They have raised prices more, put in place caps, and switched to docsis 3.1 which gives them more bandwidth without any infrastructure changes.

 

Quote

In our Petition for Investigation of Time Warner Cable (TWC) and Comcast, we point out that TWC’s High-Speed Internet service has a 97 percent profit margin and a number of people asked how that statistic was derived. Simple. Time Warner Cable provides the information, (with some caveats).

 

[TacoSenpai]

51 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

The biggest problem here is that these big ISP's spend tons of money funding politicians which in turn help them push their agendas. Look at the Michael Cohen ordeal with ATT, Verizon, Comcast, etc. Then there is the fact they are able to spend millions of dollars annually to block small startup and municipal ISPs. These are companies that took massive billion dollar government grants to build out their infrastructure yet aren't required to share these same pathways with other companies?

2 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

Sure, but what about example of the ongoing effects of the repeal?

 

At a face value there are aspects of NN I agree with.  More from the standpoint that if ISP x advertises speed x for y dollars that is what you get and the access along that line.  However, seeing that it was government corruption and being in bed with ISPs in the first place to helped them monopolize their control in many areas that there is only one service provider I have high doubts that the government could (or even would at that matter) adequately regulate the same people they are in deals with.