• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EFF Argues Streaming Service Violates FCC Regulation

jonny5

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
27,581
Reaction score
4,664
Location
Republic of Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Maybe one of the first examples of negative effects of the FCC take over of the internet:

To summarize, TMobile wants to offer as part of their wireless data service, the option to stream certain content without it counting against your data limits. They can afford to do this by optimizing it for smartphone screens, lower resolution and bit rate basically. This technically violates the FCC regs that require equal treatment for data however, so some groups are against it, even though consumers would want it.

Which might mean innovation is stamped down, lawsuit are ramped up, and so is your bill to pay for more lawyers and lobbyists.

Does T-Mobile's Binge On Service Violate Net Neutrality? Probably, Which Is All You Need To Know About Net Neutrality. - Hit & Run : Reason.com
 
How the hell is that innovation? It is just trying to bribe people to be against net neutrality.
 
Welcome to more government involvement, in the end the customer will lose.
 
Welcome to more government involvement, in the end the customer will lose.

The consumer will lose without net neutrality, without net neutrality T-Mobile could very easily say you are only allowed to use their app for streaming or slow down all other video traffic to push you towards their app.
 
The consumer will lose without net neutrality, without net neutrality T-Mobile could very easily say you are only allowed to use their app for streaming or slow down all other video traffic to push you towards their app.

Then you would go with Verizon.
 
How the hell is that innovation? It is just trying to bribe people to be against net neutrality.

They found a unique solution to the problem of high demand services that use a lot of bandwidth. If they customer likes it, whats the problem?
 
They found a unique solution to the problem of high demand services that use a lot of bandwidth. If they customer likes it, whats the problem?

The problem is that consumers are not discerning customers. They can be bribed or convinced to like all sorts of things that are bad for them.

Examples? Cigarettes, unnecessary prescription drugs (restless leg syndrome?), sugar in foods, caffeine energy drinks, overly processed foods...the list goes on.

The reason we have the FDA, FCC, SEC etc. is because we can't trust ourselves or the business sector when it comes to such things. Business is always trying to corner some market and will use any means necessary to reap profits. Aborting net neutrality is a prime example. Assessment of the validity of any offer based on immediate gratification without concern for long-term consequences? Asking your question as the measure of a good idea is pretty foolish IMO.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that consumers are not discerning customers. They can be bribed or convinced to like all sorts of things that are bad for them.

Examples? Cigarettes, unnecessary prescription drugs (restless leg syndrome?), sugar in foods, caffeine energy drinks, overly processed foods...the list goes on.

The reason we have the FDA, FCC, SEC etc. is because we can't trust ourselves or the business sector when it comes to such things. Business is always trying to corner some market and will use any means necessary to reap profits. Aborting net neutrality is a prime example. Assessment of the validity of any offer based on immediate gratification without concern for long-term consequences? Asking your question as the measure of a good idea is pretty foolish IMO.

The end result being that I am prohibited from making decisions for myself because YOU might make a bad decision for yourself. Calling yourself a libertarian is pretty foolish, IMO.
 
They found a unique solution to the problem of high demand services that use a lot of bandwidth. If they customer likes it, whats the problem?

It violates net neutrality, that is the problem. What they are doing is delivering lower quality content and offering it for free in order to bribe people against net neutrality.
 
Then you would go with Verizon.

Then since T-Mobile is allowed to do it Verizon will start doing it as well, also most people would not switch carriers due to the inconvenience, they would just live with it, making the problem worse.
 
Maybe one of the first examples of negative effects of the FCC take over of the internet:

To summarize, TMobile wants to offer as part of their wireless data service, the option to stream certain content without it counting against your data limits. They can afford to do this by optimizing it for smartphone screens, lower resolution and bit rate basically. This technically violates the FCC regs that require equal treatment for data however, so some groups are against it, even though consumers would want it.

Which might mean innovation is stamped down, lawsuit are ramped up, and so is your bill to pay for more lawyers and lobbyists.

Does T-Mobile's Binge On Service Violate Net Neutrality? Probably, Which Is All You Need To Know About Net Neutrality. - Hit & Run : Reason.com

This is a good thing. This sort of streaming not being counted against a data plan is another violation of the spirit of net neutrality.
 
The end result being that I am prohibited from making decisions for myself because YOU might make a bad decision for yourself. Calling yourself a libertarian is pretty foolish, IMO.

:lol: When you become the final arbiter of what Libertarianism is and who qualifies for a membership card, maybe I'll give you a listen.

Meanwhile, I don't equate Libertarianism with pure selfish self-interest. That would mean, for example, it's perfectly all right for you to treat the Earth you inhabit as personal property for your sole enjoyment. To act in ways that harm you, me, and any future progeny simply because..."freedom!"

That's why you see "Left" in my signifier. I believe in "enlightened self-interest," not your brand of rapacious self-interest. :coffeepap:
 
Last edited:
It violates net neutrality, that is the problem. What they are doing is delivering lower quality content and offering it for free in order to bribe people against net neutrality.

No, its to sell their product. FCC regulation is the problem here.
 
:lol: When you become the final arbiter of what Libertarianism is and who qualifies for a membership card, maybe I'll give you a listen.

Meanwhile, I don't equate Libertarianism with pure selfish self-interest. That would mean, for example, it's perfectly all right for you to treat the Earth you inhabit as personal property for your sole enjoyment. To act in ways that harm you, me, and any future progeny simply because..."freedom!"

That's why you see "Left" in my signifier. I believe in "enlightened self-interest," not your brand of rapacious self-interest. :coffeepap:

Then F off my thread.
 
The consumer will lose without net neutrality, without net neutrality T-Mobile could very easily say you are only allowed to use their app for streaming or slow down all other video traffic to push you towards their app.

Yeah, sure that's what's been happening right? Verizon stamping out all the other apps in favor of theirs? Go to the app store and show me where 100% of them are Verizon apps. Maybe in Canada that's how it works, but not here.
 
the government should run everything, then we can be a democrat utopia like the highly successful and everlasting soviet union.
 
Back
Top Bottom