Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: ISPs defend plans for two-tier net

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

    Re: ISPs defend plans for two-tier net

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    The ISPs are trying to get permission to charge you again for something you've already paid for twice.
    And they're going to succeed because corporations run congress now. The government may be initially against it but eventually they'll cave.

    Making profit means more than regulatory principles these days, or hell, even the constitution itself.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Last Seen
    03-22-16 @ 04:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    586
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: ISPs defend plans for two-tier net

    This is @ Deuce. You win. I was going to quote your message and then respond, but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I have no idea where to begin with you, you obviously have absolutely no clue how a network operates. I'm not trying to insult you, it's just that you've said so many things in this thread that show such ignorance of this issue that I have no idea what to say to you other than enjoy your Internet and when things go really wrong good luck getting your politician of choice to fix your technical issue. I'll be sure to steer clear of you in the forum from now on.

  3. #13
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,751

    Re: ISPs defend plans for two-tier net

    Quote Originally Posted by Centrehalf View Post
    This is @ Deuce. You win. I was going to quote your message and then respond, but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I have no idea where to begin with you, you obviously have absolutely no clue how a network operates. I'm not trying to insult you, it's just that you've said so many things in this thread that show such ignorance of this issue that I have no idea what to say to you other than enjoy your Internet and when things go really wrong good luck getting your politician of choice to fix your technical issue. I'll be sure to steer clear of you in the forum from now on.
    Oh, so it's just a coincidence that when my ISP started throttling Netflix they started sending me advertisements for their own streaming video service?

    Rate of transfer is what limits internet connections, not total volume. It does not cost them significantly more to provide you 5mb/sec for 1GB versus 100GB.

    And it definitely does not cost them more to send me 100GB of Youtube instead of 100GB of Netflix
    Last edited by Deuce; 03-21-11 at 01:47 PM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  4. #14
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,422
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: ISPs defend plans for two-tier net

    Slightly off topic, but not much.

    My personal favorite "money for nothing" scam is "tethering" on smartphones.

    Tethering is using your phone's data connection to provide internet access to your laptop or whatever. Most smartphones have this capability. ALL android phones released recently do this.

    Only they don't. Unless you pay extra.

    I just went through a nightmare with an OS update to my dell streak on at&t.
    You see, most of the features that made me abandon my iphone were not functional with the OS version it was released with. (1.6, 1.5 was the original) Now, the r&d people who developed the phone used 2.0 to design it, and various demonstrations of features limited to the 2.0 release means it must work on the phone. Apparently, mkst wireless phone providers disable the tethering option before you buy the phone. On the open source Android platform, on devices designed to use this platform, it is virtually impossible to actually disable this feature. But they try, and in the course of doing so they radically delay os update releases, as well as creating issues with functionality overall.

    Limiting tethering when everybody had unlimited data plans was annoying, but understandable.

    When I got my new phone, I looked into adding the tethering option. I assumed that since new data plans are for a preset amount of data, that there must be some kind of value added. Faster speeds or priority or something.

    Nope. Nada.

    On at&t, 6 gigabytes of data is $20 for your phone. If you want to be able to tether it costs an additional $25/month. For the exact same 6 gigs of data.

    $25 a month to unbreak the phone they broke in the first place, which has caused considerable annoyance and performance issues with their phones.

    Frankly, I feel that if you charge me by the bit, I should be able to use those bits however I please.

    The carrier's networks are totally unaffected by the device using the bandwidth, as long as you're selling bandwidth by the bit.

    They just want to sell you data service for all your devices separately. Sell you wireless data cards for your laptop or whatever.

    It's their business, but once again, their business is our problem. And I will never pay extra for nothing but a less functional phone. $300 a year for NOTHING, and the functionality issues are still there even if you pay. They are the result of the "switch" being pasted on in the first place.

    Anyway, this relates to the thread as net neutrality is also all about money. That and controlling access to information.

    Kinda the internet equivalent of the Citizens United decision. Apparently, they now intend to charge for objective information, by making it possible to limit "free" information by restricting access to areas of the webs where such info resides to those who pay extra for the privelege.

    The whole "BP paying google to redirect searches about the spill to BP sites" thing sucks.

    I never really expected simple truth to become a commodity. Missed that one completely.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: ISPs defend plans for two-tier net

    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant Noodle View Post
    The corporations that already have deep pockets dont give a rats ass about what is RIGHT. These are the people that roll back odometers in cars and then sell them!



    CONTINUED: BBC News - ISPs defend plans for two-tier net
    So what's the big deal?

  6. #16
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,394
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: ISPs defend plans for two-tier net

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    So what's the big deal?
    I am not sure if this is a troll post?


    If not I will explain what could happen. Say your local ISP throttles all speeds to anyone not willing to purchase a "preferred content provider" package. They throttle these to 0.1 kb/s while preferred members remain at the current speeds. Anyone not willing to pay would be rendered useless. While this is an extreme example it gives an idea to the tactic. Its all about ISPs strong arming to acquire more money which is exactly what they plan to do.

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: ISPs defend plans for two-tier net

    Quote Originally Posted by Baralis View Post
    I am not sure if this is a troll post?


    If not I will explain what could happen. Say your local ISP throttles all speeds to anyone not willing to purchase a "preferred content provider" package. They throttle these to 0.1 kb/s while preferred members remain at the current speeds. Anyone not willing to pay would be rendered useless. While this is an extreme example it gives an idea to the tactic. Its all about ISPs strong arming to acquire more money which is exactly what they plan to do.
    Do ISPs offer a justification for wanting to do this? Are they arguing for more efficient use of bandwidth or is there a public relations official going on record saying it's just for profit?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •