RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality

RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/12/2014 5:22:50 PM)
This is pretty simple with net neutrality innovation rules and the next small company can get its start without needing to find the money to buy a huge chunk of bandwidth. Without NN innovation dies. There won't be the next Twitter or Skype or Google or pretty much any other internet company no one thought of before.

stef -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/12/2014 5:35:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Straw man much? Oh the fucking irony.... He's Irony Man.

thishereboi -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/12/2014 5:55:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen This is pretty simple with net neutrality innovation rules and the next small company can get its start without needing to find the money to buy a huge chunk of bandwidth. Without NN innovation dies. There won't be the next Twitter or Skype or Google or pretty much any other internet company no one thought of before. Yea, I would have to agree with this.

Sanity -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/12/2014 6:27:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Straw man much? Oh the fucking irony.... He's Irony Man. The one who all the trolls are talking about... ;?)

MrRodgers -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/13/2014 3:45:15 PM)
These posts get to the muck because that's all anybody cares about. Trying to tell you, this is America so it's not about the Inter-fucking-net...it's about fucking M O N E Y !! [It] IS always...about money. The capitalist is thinking, having little or no competition thanx to very favorable merging over the years, now having the market power to fuck with the big 3 orig. broadcasters that govt. has allowed me SO..... .....IF [I] can fuck with spectrum, if I can find a way to MAKE more MONEY via a two tiered or 3 or 4 tiered spectrum over the fucking Inter-fucking-net...then I fucking WILL. Netflix already caved and like a cheap suit. Google, Yahoo, FaceFuck...er Book, Titter...er Twits. Whatever. Ahhh....the mother-load !! As Carl Sagan would say...we're talking BILL...Yins and BILL...Yins of dollars. This should prove easy to buy from govt., all is going just as we've paid for and planned and should be yet another huge profit center. End of argument as there is...NO argument, IT IS about the fucking Money !!

slvemike4u -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/13/2014 6:01:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Straw man much? Oh the fucking irony.... You mean, the irony of you calling yourself "polite" right? Or you claiming any link to "sanity" ?

Edwynn -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/14/2014 9:18:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC The cable companies would like to be able to charge extra rates for premium service. Where do they not already do that? Inquiring minds want to know! quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC Even so, it lets startups like google eventually become google. You say that like it's a good thing. quote: It lets "the people" converse with each other rather than letting billionaires talk at us. Yeah, like google or twitterbutt or face-ass billionaires not doing anything with all this 'converstion' and 'searching' and 'ordering' and everything else but completely standing aside and looking politely away, which is how they became billionaires in the first place, as the vox populi ... 'converse'. ... Just too funny.

DomKen -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/14/2014 10:45:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC The cable companies would like to be able to charge extra rates for premium service. Where do they not already do that? Inquiring minds want to know! Right now actually. All content is delivered to you at the same speed, or at least it is supposed to be. The discussion isn't whether or not you can pay for more or less bandwidth but whether the ISP's can speed up or slow down your access to specific content based on whether those providers have paid them.

Edwynn -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 1:04:34 AM)
My cable company charges from low to high based on both MPS speed and total download limit in Mbytes. Economy Plus Internet $19.99 per month for 12 mo. Download speeds up to 3 Mbps Add to Cart Internet Plus $39.99 per month for 12 mo. 25 Mbps TV local channels HBO GO® included Add to Cart Internet Plus with Blast!® $49.99 per month for 12 mo. Download speeds up to 50 Mbps TV local channels HBO GO® included Add to Cart Elsewhere on the Comcast site: 3 Mbps 19.99/Mo., 6 Mbps 49.95/Mo., 25 Mbps 29.99/Mo., 105 Mbsp 89.99/Mo. All the above for the first 12 months. The price essentially doubles after two years for most offers.

Edwynn -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 1:10:37 AM)
Not that I have any sympathy towards the cable companies at all, but they are just looking to get a scoop of all that provider ad revenue, something that we as individual users are powerless to do. Now my battery has run out. Later.

Edwynn -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 2:22:06 AM)
I'm not saying that the FCC's classification of cable companies as "information providers" rather than "telecommunications providers" isn't complete bunkum. What I am saying is that people who were asleep at the wheel when this very same compunction for the regulators to avoid regulating has been going on since 1981, and if 'net neutrality' people completely overlooked what has gone on in the FTC (especially that) and the FDA and the SEC and the CFTC and the USAD, etc. then don't expect others who went back to sleep waiting for anyone else to notice to get as exited over the issue as you expect. This is nothing more than good old-fashioned economic "rent seeking," and it's been going on long before the net techies decided to wake up and get a clue. Google, Face Butt, etc. make hundreds of millions off of almost anything we do on the internet, and none of it comes back to us. MY vote would be that the FCC -require- that the properly termed "telecommunication providers" tack on a hefty surcharge to the "Ad Revenue Collectors" (AKA "information providers") and then -require- them to reduce our cable or satellite monthly bill accordingly. Likewise a similar reduction of our credit card charges by a "consumer's-taxing" of the credit score companies who make millions off our purchasing and payment history, etc.

Edwynn -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 4:10:44 AM)
But the problem is that all the text-driving and cell-phone-talking-when they're-supposed-to-be-ordering-while-at-the head-of-the-line at the restaurant or coffee shop and twittering-apping and music-and-movie-stealing pizza-eating blasting-earbud GAMERS dropped a pepperoni from mouth to lap, having -just now- somehow caught on to this net neutrality thing as being some potential threat to all the above, ... so then all the world is now to take notice of their concerns. Good luck with that. "Regulation" in all forms and venues has been renegade, under essentially rogue governments, for decades already. If you had fucking shut up with the texting and bumping into people in public while yacking nonsense and drivel on the cell phone and otherwise ignoring the rest of the real world while you were killing millions of people in your stupid games, then you might have noticed sometime beforehand.

DomKen -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 6:24:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn My cable company charges from low to high based on both MPS speed and total download limit in Mbytes. You don't understand the issue. The ISP can certainly sell you a certain bandwidth. What net neutrality is about is whether they can throttle certain content coming over their network to you. Say Microsoft pays Comcast more than Google so now Bing simply comes up way faster. The big problem with that is that it could very well freeze out the next big thing as it would never get the bandwidth needed to get noticed.

Edwynn -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 6:54:31 AM)
I understand completely. But why is the silence on gouging customers now become all this crowd of the incensed over charging another business likewise? That tells me something about how people have been steered completely awry. I'm just saying that those who just now figured out that the regulators have been favoring the regulated for 30+ years already are quite late to the party, and not in any 'fashionable' sense whatsoever. I am also saying that I would not nominate either the Gooble or FaceButt add-tracker businesses for the "Useful Innovation to Society Hall of Fame." And their lawyers are every bit as good as the cable/satellite companies' lawyers, which is all that matters or has ever mattered. The guy who invented the Shark-Bite plumbing fittings is a hero to society, or this woman and her affordable medical testing devices. These are the true innovators, not the the Gamers and Add-Revenue-trackers. If you want to fight for a cause, make it a useful cause. Gooble and FaceButt ain't all that, nowhere close.

DomKen -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 7:31:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn I understand completely. But why is the silence on gouging customers now become all this crowd of the incensed over charging another business likewise? That tells me something about how people have been steered completely awry. There are issues at the consumer end as well but that is not the topic at hand.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 7:50:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn I understand completely. But why is the silence on gouging customers now become all this crowd of the incensed over charging another business likewise? That tells me something about how people have been steered completely awry. There are issues at the consumer end as well but that is not the topic at hand. The thing is, internet is title I while it rolled out and developed so it had a light regulatory touch, we can easily see what happens if it is allowed to stay there, it will become like (and is becoming like) the cable industry, monopoly and price gouging and lack of innovation. We would like to avoid that, I think.

Edwynn -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 8:34:40 AM)
OK, I'm game, if anyone can explain just what is at stake for the end-user, and how. I don't do offline or online or cloud gaming, and I have to fix my dad's and his new wife's computers and email and online situations at least once every two months now because the stupid browsers (any of them) just can't stop shitting their pants enough to stop their incessant new-and-something-else-to figure-out version every chance they get, etc. Yes, I would like to avoid any move towards monopoly, but I'm not seeing where the existing tacit collusion towards ever greater annoyance isn't already too far there. Email, browser, website, all of them hire pizza-munching gamers to design new trip bars for the unfortunate seekers of simple utility. I once had to make a return on one item of an ebay purchase, and the fuckwit just 'refunded' the amount in question to my non-existent paypal 'account', because that's how ebay directs their sellers to do things. Took me $7.00+ in on-hold minutes to straighten it out with paypal. What frikken forced monopoly doesn't already exist? Is any new putatively positive net neutrality initiative going to deal with things like that? I'll take peoples' word for it that things could get even worse, but I would hope that this 'new awakening' might stretch further to fix what is already not working very well as it is.

ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 8:50:00 AM)
Edwynn: If you're referring to why net neutrality matters and what is at stake for the end-user, the Netfilx case should make that very clear. Without solid rules in place that guarantee that all data be treated equally you - the end-user - will end up paying more for the services you want. If Netflix charges $10/month but now has to pay money to Comcast to not slow their service, Netflix will pass that price along to you. So instead of $10 maybe Netflix has to charge $12. In the meantime, Comcast starts up their own online movie service for $10 per month. It's a clear case of unfair competition. Comcast (or any other ISP) could just as easily charge other providers for "premium" service. How about they slow down Google, Yahoo, and any other large mail provider? You would then be more likely to use Comcast mail. All of the ISP's have to ability to throttle traffic to/from any service they want. Net Neutrality - at its heart - is meant to stop that.

Edwynn -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 9:13:32 AM)
All good and well, but this is dealing with the horses that have long bolted out the barn door. The way to truly fix the situation is to allow competing cable companies in any local market, rather than the monopoly awarded in almost all localities, as is the situation now. The AT&T did the same thing you are talking about in charging higher rates to MCI, Sprint, et al., back in the day, and that's when the government broke up the Bell monopoly. The net neutrality people are arguing that some monopoly might happen, when it in fact already exists in most every municipality.

Lucylastic -> RE: Obama Urges F.C.C. to Adopt Rules to Protect Net Neutrality (11/15/2014 9:16:01 AM)
banging my head

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.298828E-02