Page 9 of 43 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 430

Thread: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

  1. #81
    Sage
    whysoserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Last Seen
    12-29-16 @ 03:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,170

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    You aren't helping your argument. But speaking of knowledge of Net Neutrality, can you explain it in terms more advanced than, say, an Oatmeal cartoon?
    I'm sure he can, but I'd like to help as well. When you think about Net Neutrality, you can think of the Internet as it has always been. When you think about not imposing Net Neutrality, you can think about this:

    Slow Comcast speeds were costing Netflix customers - Aug. 29, 2014
    The inside story of how Netflix came to pay Comcast for internet traffic – Quartz
    Advertisement

    Net Neutrality is a great piece of legislation - especially for conservatives - because it promotes freedom, while requiring almost no oversight. Businesses and end users would be the regulators. Oh, your connection to www.debatepolitics.com has been getting throttled? Sue the **** out of your ISP. That would be your right.

    Otherwise, without Net Neutrality, I don't think you'd see many changes immediately. I, personally, believe the ILECs fought this hard to beat Net Neutrality as a safety net. One of their biggest income sources has always been TV service, and more and more end users are moving away of that in favor of streaming. Streaming can be cheaper, and while sometimes inconvenient, the end user gets to really control what content he/she is paying for. And that's what it comes down to:

    Ownership of who gets your entertainment dollar. The ILECs want to make sure that they aren't just providing your data services.
    Ted Cruz is the dumbest person alive.

  2. #82
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    Go ahead, let the isps have their way.

    Opposing Obama's suggestion that the FCC classify the internet as a Utility in no way means letting ISP's have their way.
    Where do you come up with such nonsense?

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    And we won't have to hear from you more than once every half hour or so when DP gets slow laned.
    Yep! Figures. You had nothing of value to add to this thread. Grow up and knock off the absurd bs.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  3. #83
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    Can't wait til they find a way to speculate on internet usage.

    Then we can pay extra for nothing like we do for gas and power and heating oil.
    I guess you haven't been paying attention, because if Obama gets his way your internet is going to be taxed like a utility.
    There is no way around that.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  4. #84
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Do you drive-by post a lot? Because it seems you do. You can't win an argument in one thread, then you hurry to another thread and post hoping others won't respond. Well, sigh alright.

    Can you tell us how net neutrality restricts innovation? I'll wait.
    Dodn't y'all ask the same kinds of questuons about Obamacare?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #85
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Odd, I do not recall that Politicians are not supposed to point out the supposed downfalls of legislation.
    And classifying it as a Utility like Obama wants has many a pitfall and is not needed.


    Not just throttling, but packet prioritization also.
    And it is going to happen regardless of neutrality (for pay packet prioritization), because it has too.



    And here is the problem. That is a topic for a different discussion.
    This is about classifying it as a Utility which is not needed.


    Irrelevant.
    One should not want to give that power to the Government and by virtue, to political appointees for our elected reps have to react against it in the first place.
    Especially when it is not needed.
    All you have done is highlight another reason as to why it shouldn't be classified as a utility. Politicization.
    I'm not sure you understand what net neutrality actually is. Net Neutrality means that ISPs aren't allowed to do packet prioritization. It's not inevitable. Net Neutrality is the way the Tier 1 networks run, and those are what the ISPs connect to to "provide you with internet". Companies like Google that want a "fastlane" do that now by building server farms with direct access to the ISPs, skipping the internet backbone all together.

    Packet prioritization is like the power company shutting off certain brands of appliances in your house unless those companies pay the power company a special fee.

    Here's a simple principle. You pay for bandwidth to connect to the internet. Content providers pay for bandwidth to host on the internet. That's it. No third party internet troll should be able to establish a toll road in the middle of the internet for the sole purpose of taxing traffic.

    Anytime there's an issue like this that suddenly becomes politicized; it helps to ask yourself where the money's coming from. Comcast and other ISPs et al are outlobbying the net neutrality folks something like 100-1. When you're on the side of a company that's idea of customer service is that they'll be there sometime between 12 and 4.. probably .. and waits until you're not paying attention to drastically raise you rates... Well perhaps its time for some reflection.

    Has anyone not had an issue with their cable company / ISP?

  6. #86
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,697

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    I'm sure he can, but I'd like to help as well. When you think about Net Neutrality, you can think of the Internet as it has always been. When you think about not imposing Net Neutrality, you can think about this:

    Slow Comcast speeds were costing Netflix customers - Aug. 29, 2014
    The inside story of how Netflix came to pay Comcast for internet traffic – Quartz
    Advertisement

    Net Neutrality is a great piece of legislation - especially for conservatives - because it promotes freedom, while requiring almost no oversight. Businesses and end users would be the regulators. Oh, your connection to www.debatepolitics.com has been getting throttled? Sue the **** out of your ISP. That would be your right.

    Otherwise, without Net Neutrality, I don't think you'd see many changes immediately. I, personally, believe the ILECs fought this hard to beat Net Neutrality as a safety net. One of their biggest income sources has always been TV service, and more and more end users are moving away of that in favor of streaming. Streaming can be cheaper, and while sometimes inconvenient, the end user gets to really control what content he/she is paying for. And that's what it comes down to:

    Ownership of who gets your entertainment dollar. The ILECs want to make sure that they aren't just providing your data services.
    Except that the articles you posted got the Comcast-NetFlix story pretty skewed.

    The decrease in NetFlix traffic with Comcast customers had nothing to do with Comcast and everything to do with Level 3 peering contract dispute with Comcast. During the period of time that Comcast was in contract dispute with Comcast, where Level 3 was raising the prices on Comcast due to an increase in overages on Comcast's usage Level 3 stopped managing the peering for Comcast resulting in flat line in aggregate bandwidth for Comcast. Comcast wanted NetFlix to help pay for the new contract because those increased costs for Comcast were primarily due to an increase in NetFlix traffic to Comcast customers so charging NetFlix would then impose the added costs on NETFLIX USERS rather than on all Comcast users whether or not they used Netflix.

    The funny thing is the bandwidth problems brought about by the Comcast and Level 3 dispute WAS NET NEUTRAL it just happened to hit NetFLix the hardest because they have a severe QoS demand for optimal functionality.
    Last edited by jmotivator; 11-18-14 at 12:14 PM.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  7. #87
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,420

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    So many arguments from ignorance on this subject. This is the same response I used in a different thread, but it applies here as well, so here goes:

    If you don't work as a Sr. Systems Admin, Sr. Network Admin, or Systems Engineer, then you have nothing to add to this debate and almost any argument you give will be based in ignorance.

    That said, I work as the Sr. System and Network Administrator for what is easily one of the highest traffic sites hosted in the Midwest (both in terms of bandwidth and page views). So I know my **** on this one.

    Basically, as wikipedia states Net Neutrality is:

    The principle that Internet service providers and governments should treat all data on the Internet equally, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication.

    That does not mean that under the current system you cannot buy higher tiers of internet service. These higher tiers of internet service basically mean that:

    1. Internet bandwidth at the provider is shared by less customers than lower tiered service.

    2. Internet bandwidth has a lower latency than lower tiered service.

    3. Your connection is more reliable (due to higher redundancy at the carrier level).

    Those are all available to you under the current system. What the current system does not allow for is a carrier or provider to prioritize their content over other providers, or to censor their competitors. For example, without net neutrality, Time Warner could utilize QoS to ensure that any voip packets coming from their service has a much lower latency than say a Vonage customer on their network. So calls from a TWC customer would be crystal clear while a Vonage customer would have forced jitter due to high latency. The same would be true for their video streaming vs say, Amazon's. Hell it could go so far as stock trades being prioritized over certain networks while others get higher latencies. The potential for corruption is nearly endless absent Net Neutrality. Who benefits from that other than carriers lobbying congress?
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  8. #88
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 12:34 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,888

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    I'm not sure you understand what net neutrality actually is. Net Neutrality means that ISPs aren't allowed to do packet prioritization. It's not inevitable. Net Neutrality is the way the Tier 1 networks run, and those are what the ISPs connect to to "provide you with internet". Companies like Google that want a "fastlane" do that now by building server farms with direct access to the ISPs, skipping the internet backbone all together.

    Packet prioritization is like the power company shutting off certain brands of appliances in your house unless those companies pay the power company a special fee.

    Here's a simple principle. You pay for bandwidth to connect to the internet. Content providers pay for bandwidth to host on the internet. That's it. No third party internet troll should be able to establish a toll road in the middle of the internet for the sole purpose of taxing traffic.

    Anytime there's an issue like this that suddenly becomes politicized; it helps to ask yourself where the money's coming from. Comcast and other ISPs et al are outlobbying the net neutrality folks something like 100-1. When you're on the side of a company that's idea of customer service is that they'll be there sometime between 12 and 4.. probably .. and waits until you're not paying attention to drastically raise you rates... Well perhaps its time for some reflection.

    Has anyone not had an issue with their cable company / ISP?
    The bolded statement is not accurate. Net Neutrality means ISPs are not allowed to alter, restrict or enhance packets based on origination, destination, or saturation.

    Net Neutrality means not only can Joe User not pay for more bandwidth or priority, but the ISP cannot stop him from hindering your bandwidth through over-use.

  9. #89
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    So many arguments from ignorance on this subject. This is the same response I used in a different thread, but it applies here as well, so here goes:

    If you don't work as a Sr. Systems Admin, Sr. Network Admin, or Systems Engineer, then you have nothing to add to this debate and almost any argument you give will be based in ignorance.

    That said, I work as the Sr. System and Network Administrator for what is easily one of the highest traffic sites hosted in the Midwest (both in terms of bandwidth and page views). So I know my **** on this one.

    Basically, as wikipedia states Net Neutrality is:

    The principle that Internet service providers and governments should treat all data on the Internet equally, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication.

    That does not mean that under the current system you cannot buy higher tiers of internet service. These higher tiers of internet service basically mean that:

    1. Internet bandwidth at the provider is shared by less customers than lower tiered service.

    2. Internet bandwidth has a lower latency than lower tiered service.

    3. Your connection is more reliable (due to higher redundancy at the carrier level).

    Those are all available to you under the current system. What the current system does not allow for is a carrier or provider to prioritize their content over other providers, or to censor their competitors. For example, without net neutrality, Time Warner could utilize QoS to ensure that any voip packets coming from their service has a much lower latency than say a Vonage customer on their network. So calls from a TWC customer would be crystal clear while a Vonage customer would have forced jitter due to high latency. The same would be true for their video streaming vs say, Amazon's. Hell it could go so far as stock trades being prioritized over certain networks while others get higher latencies. The potential for corruption is nearly endless absent Net Neutrality. Who benefits from that other than carriers lobbying congress?
    This is net neutrality, not the govenrment democrat bill called "Net Neutrality".
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  10. #90
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,420

    Re: Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by ReverendHellh0und View Post
    This is net neutrality, not the govenrment democrat bill called "Net Neutrality".
    I am not sure where they differ. Moreover, I don't know of a single IT professional that opposes Net Neutrality. It all falls under existing law unless the law is changed. The 1996 Telco Act specifically.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

Page 9 of 43 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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