Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • AndalayBay

      SSL Installed   05/29/2018

      Second IP obtained. The issues with IPv6 have also been fixed, but we can't switch to HTTPS until we switch forum software. We can't switch to HTTPS without a current license with IPS.
Visceral Moonlight

Net Neutrality

Recommended Posts

Net neutrality is the concept that all Internet traffic is treated equally along the lines. So the ISP cannot allow one website to go any slower than any other across their own provider lines as we, the consumers, are paying for all of this traffic at a maximum speed. Along with that, ISPs shouldn't charge each website to speed up their service.Now, Tom Wheeler of the FCC has written up rules which completely throw all that out the window and this is scheduled to be voted on on May 15th. Two commissioners have requested a delay, he continues to press on however. It should be noted that he comes from a telecommunications lobby, so his interests lie with the ISPs.If preferential treatment is allowed, it will degrade the overall quality of the Internet. We are already paying the ISPs to deliver the content up to the maximum speed, so they're supposed to keep up with their infrastructure to ensure that happens. This discrimination could also lead to them pushing out competitors. They could, for instance, limit services that are not in the cable delivery industry, which many ISPs are, in order to force people to sign up for their bundled services. That's theoretical but it is interesting as Comcast is also trying to merge with Time Warner. Both own multiple television networks and other media services. Both are ISPs and both are cable providers. Both of them are very large. The combined power will allow them to limit services, such as YouTube or Netflix, so that prices could be driven up.Although blocking packets is disallowed, nothing says that they can't be slowed down to a point where it's not feasible to even use a service. A real world example is the fact that Verizon and Comcast have been throttling Netflix to the point where both the ISPs' customers and Netflix's customers, being one and the same, have service degradation. They forced Netflix to pay them money to lift this throttling. Once done, customers actually were able to get good service.This needn't be limited to video, though. This could be anything but video is the best way to show the effect.A lot of Internet companies have protested, even sending a letter to voice their displeasure. Various sites have started to even throttle the FCC in protest (see: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/web-host-gives-fcc-a-28-8kbps-slow-lane-in-net-neutrality-protest/) and people are even starting to camp in front of the FCC and are picketing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Net neutrality is the concept that all Internet traffic is treated equally along the lines. So the ISP cannot allow one website to go any slower than any other across their own provider lines as we, the consumers, are paying for all of this traffic at a maximum speed. Along with that, ISPs shouldn't charge each website to speed up their service.Now, Tom Wheeler of the FCC has written up rules which completely throw all that out the window and this is scheduled to be voted on on May 15th. Two commissioners have requested a delay, he continues to press on however. It should be noted that he comes from a telecommunications lobby, so his interests lie with the ISPs.If preferential treatment is allowed, it will degrade the overall quality of the Internet. We are already paying the ISPs to deliver the content up to the maximum speed, so they're supposed to keep up with their infrastructure to ensure that happens. This discrimination could also lead to them pushing out competitors. They could, for instance, limit services that are not in the cable delivery industry, which many ISPs are, in order to force people to sign up for their bundled services. That's theoretical but it is interesting as Comcast is also trying to merge with Time Warner. Both own multiple television networks and other media services. Both are ISPs and both are cable providers. Both of them are very large. The combined power will allow them to limit services, such as YouTube or Netflix, so that prices could be driven up.Although blocking packets is disallowed, nothing says that they can't be slowed down to a point where it's not feasible to even use a service. A real world example is the fact that Verizon and Comcast have been throttling Netflix to the point where both the ISPs' customers and Netflix's customers, being one and the same, have service degradation. They forced Netflix to pay them money to lift this throttling. Once done, customers actually were able to get good service.This needn't be limited to video, though. This could be anything but video is the best way to show the effect.A lot of Internet companies have protested, even sending a letter to voice their displeasure. Various sites have started to even throttle the FCC in protest (see: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/web-host-gives-fcc-a-28-8kbps-slow-lane-in-net-neutrality-protest/) and people are even starting to camp in front of the FCC and are picketing them.

A very interesting subject you bring up and I think it will be a lot worse later on if the new rules is passed on of what ISP can and shouldn't do towards customers, competitors especially if the ISP companies want to have monopoly of the traffic on the internet.

 

So blocking/throttling the site FCC is probably the only alternative other companies have in order to survive against this complete rubbish that Tom Wheeler on FCC wants to achieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with this actually. That might surprise you as I run a community site and maintain the server to give our visitors the fastest response possible. Now I will say that I think that the States would be better served with more competition and the government allowing the big telecommunication companies to merge is very concerning. However I do feel that those that monopolize the internet should pay more for the privilege. When I say monopolize the internet, I'm referring to those who watch entire movies over the internet and other such bandwidth hogging activities.

 

In Canada we have addressed the issue by putting quotas on your internet usage. If you use more than 300 GB of bandwidth in a month (download), then you will be charged a fee for each additional GB. My ISP charges $0.25/GB up to a maximum of $25/mth. I've never managed to get anywhere near the quota.

 

So perhaps the answer is a usage based fee rather than a premium for faster speeds.

 

For those that support the net neutrality stance, there is a petition which has already gotten the FCC to revise their proposal.

 

And here's an article which explains the counterpoint much better than I possibly can. Seriously, give that article a read before you jump on the net neutrality bandwagon. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with this actually. That might surprise you as I run a community site and maintain the server to give our visitors the fastest response possible. Now I will say that I think that the States would be better served with more competition and the government allowing the big telecommunication companies to merge is very concerning. However I do feel that those that monopolize the internet should pay more for the privilege. When I say monopolize the internet, I'm referring to those who watch entire movies over the internet and other such bandwidth hogging activities.

 

In Canada we have addressed the issue by putting quotas on your internet usage. If you use more than 300 GB of bandwidth in a month (download), then you will be charged a fee for each additional GB. My ISP charges $0.25/GB up to a maximum of $25/mth. I've never managed to get anywhere near the quota.

I'm concerned too especially what Edward Snowdan revealed that NSA have done a massive surveillance of innocent people around the world.

 

In Sweden FRA cannot do the same thing as NSA does in US unless FRA have a court order (only valid for e-mails from abroad to Sweden and not from Sweden to a foreign country outside of EU) and the individual is a suspect for criminal activities IIRC.

 

More power means heavier responsibilities, which can sometimes be a privilege itself.

 

I don't know how it's now, but in the 90's there were a quota system for a customer to pay extra money for additional Mb's in bandwidth which is basically the same there is in Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to see at all. Nobody wants to pay the internet. And I don't think Congress really cares about us. They only care about profit. We did create the internet to have free roam and open it is. There are a lot of YouTubers explaining better than I can. The vote will end on December 14th next month. I support Net Neutrality. For example, If I go to youtube one day and it says that I need to pay for it. Then guess what I'll be pretty upset. It is an option to do it, but I don't want to pay just to get faster ISP. After they do repeal it, it will go across the globe. It will upset more than half of this world's population. It will affect, twitter, twitch, facebook, google plus, youtube. FCC and Congress, in my opinion, don't care about We the people. Our rights, our Constitutional rights. I've been researching a lot of YouTubers who explain it. This is real, it's not a joke. I don't want to pay more than I have now for bills. We have too many bills as it should be. It's getting worse and the internet is under attack. This needs to stop. A few YouTubers say that Net Neutrality is dying. This is extremely important and people think that it's not and it's a joke. Well, guess what? It's everywhere on the internet especially YouTube. I was pretty upset when I found this out a week ago when Markiplier was discussing it seriously. So I rather not pay everything on the internet. I would probably run out of money by the time I get paid every two weeks and then I still ran out of money again. 

So, I support Net Neutrality. 
However, I know it was going on since 2014. But probably before that. And there's a lot of websites like Hulu, Crunchyroll, Netflix has already have paid subscription which is understandable to view exclusive episodes, no ads and etc. But paying for the whole internet like exclusive websites like twitter, twitch, facebook, youtube and etc. In my opinion is way out of hand and a really bad idea. 

 

Edited by TheDarkListener34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You going to pay even more for net neutrality because the infrastructure would have to be improved. You can do that for free. So you’ll pay for it with substantial access fees to pay for the new infrastructure.

You guys really need to learn nothing is free. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Net neutrality isn't necessarily about infrastructure, it's more about keeping the ISPs honest.

For example:

Let's say Trump owned an ISP. Without net neutrality, he could block CNN's website from his customers just because he couldn't like them or force CNN to pay him more than, say, Fox News (he wouldn't even need to charge Fox) to let people access the site. Under net neutrality, this sort of thing wouldn't be allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also about not having any limits. Unlimited internet requires more bandwidth which means more infrastructure. It would be pretty stupid of an ISP to block sites, although if they wanted to, I don't see how you could stop them. As a consumer you do what consumers always do: you go somewhere else and that ISP doesn't get your money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, we can't go anywhere else. The FCC also has regulations regarding which providers are allowed to operate in an area. For example, in some areas AT&T is legally your only option. Speaking of, AT&T blocked some sites a few years back when they got into a Tiff with some communities. The FCC was different back then and AT&T was told they couldn't do that. Nowadays, they'd probably get away with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada doesn't allow monopolies. We used to have limited choices, but the CRTC (our version of FCC) has enacted regulations that force Bell Canada to share their infrastructure. We don't have any options for cable. There's only one provider for each area. I don't know why they allow that. But we do have lots of options for satellite. I refuse to deal with Bell Canada or Rogers cable.

You guys need to vote in government officials who will change the FCC rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have that rule for telephone lines (it was part of the original lawsuit that resulted in the breakup of AT&T) but it doesn't cover Internet as their definition of the terminology is warped beyond belief.

We can't. That's done by Congressional appointment. We have zero control over it. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see merits to both sides AB, for sure.  If I weren't so averse to the cold, I'd gladly move to Canada. I rather liked Calgary when I traveled through there on my way to Banff. Of course I was only 15 at the time and didn't know what to look for. The single cable provider thing seems weird. No weirder than some of the things we've got going in various states around here I guess. :)

Edited by RavenMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what we thought with this last election..

Nope, they've Gerrymandered the districts so well that the good ol boyz are lifers.

We've had some good people run from time-to-time, but have always found that they've got to be on the Republican or Democratic ticket to get anywhere near the needed votes. And at least if they run on the Republican ticket, they're ALWAYS knocked out in the Caucuses in favor of who the party leadership (read: good old boys) want to win. Not sure about the Dem side, because it's just a given that Dems here will never get into federal office. THE CHURCH (LDS) likes everybody to vote straight republican..

Edited by RavenMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of good people primarying those good old boys this time around though. Check out what groups like Justice Democrats and Brand New Congress are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely, I couldn't agree more! Our current Senatorial President Pro Tem, third in line-of-succession to the Presidency, and often Designated Survivor is Orrin Hatch (sadly from my own home state). He's been a senator for FORTY YEARS! I see no end to his reign without term limits. One of the main "values" in Utah (read: Mormon) culture is "Tradition" (Capital T). Tradition with no thought to the appropriateness, logic, or even actual morality as a consequence of following Tradition. This is pounded into people here from the time they're small children. Consequently, we have people like Hatch, who have maintained office simply out of tradition. This is repeated around here down to the local level. Our mayor here served for 23 years before just finally being ousted a month ago. And only because enough people finally got tired of him selling every scrap of land he could to developers for a hefty kickback, and pretty much hanging a sign on his door saying "For Sale to Highest Bidder". I imagine this scenario plays out around other parts of the country, and leads to the stagnation of the political landscape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts:

AIIIGH
AAAAAAAIGH
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIGHNONONONONONONONO

Also:

1. Go to gofccyourself.com ON YOUR DESKTOP, they made the website not work with phones
(the shortcut John Oliver made to the hard-to-find FCC comment page)
2. Click on the 17-108 link (Restoring Internet Freedom)
2. Click on "express"
3. Be sure to hit "ENTER" after you put in your name & info so it registers.
4. In the comment gsection write, "I strongly support net neutrality backed by Title 2 oversight of ISPs."
5. Click to submit, done. - Make sure you hit submit at the end!
**Copy and paste this into your own status update!**

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×