• 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!

Do you support Net Neutrality?

Do you support Net Neutrality?

  • Total voters
    68
ReverendHellh0und said:
Again, you haven't stated which "net neutrality" you are speaking of.
Click to expand...

The thread question doesn't make a distinction between different net neutralities, but net neutrality as a general principle.
 
Cardinal said:
The thread question doesn't elaborate on different net neutralities, but net neutrality as a general principle.
Click to expand...



There is the democrat proposal to control the internet called "Net Neutrality" I am against that bill.
 
Cardinal said:
And what would you have in its place?
Click to expand...



10805756_10152836742812726_1229765909163887911_n.jpg
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
10805756_10152836742812726_1229765909163887911_n.jpg
Click to expand...

Your graphic advocates a toothless principle over a regulation that actually helps to preserve net neutrality. Hence, "idea" vs. "regulatory tactic." It also completely avoids how one would go about "supporting" net neutrality.
 
Cardinal said:
Your graphic advocates a toothless principle over a regulation that actually helps to preserve net neutrality. Hence, "idea" vs. "regulatory tactic." It also completely avoids how one would go about "supporting" net neutrality.
Click to expand...



One could write a simple law based on the left have the FCC enforce it.



Do you realize, that if passed the democrat party bill would kill netflix? lol


"The legislation, known as the Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act, would require that the FCC bar broadband carriers from selling so-called Internet fast lanes. For instance, Netflix would not be able to pay AT&T for faster delivery of its data packets to users than the data packets from smaller, competing internet video service that may not be able to pay for “premium” carriage."

netflix paid comcast for a direct pipe.

Senate Democrats propose bill that would force FCC to enforce net neutrality | VentureBeat | Media | by Mark Sullivan
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
One could write a simple law based on the left have the FCC enforce it.
Click to expand...

One could, but will one do so? Are there currently any counter-proposals, any bills written by Republicans to do as you suggest?


ReverendHellh0und said:
Do you realize, that if passed the democrat party bill would kill netflix? lol


"The legislation, known as the Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act, would require that the FCC bar broadband carriers from selling so-called Internet fast lanes. For instance, Netflix would not be able to pay AT&T for faster delivery of its data packets to users than the data packets from smaller, competing internet video service that may not be able to pay for “premium” carriage."

netflix paid comcast for a direct pipe.

Senate Democrats propose bill that would force FCC to enforce net neutrality | VentureBeat | Media | by Mark Sullivan
Click to expand...

What I get from this is that Verizon (and co) would have been wise to leave well enough alone.
 
Cardinal said:
One could, but will one do so? Are there currently any counter-proposals, any bills written by Republicans to do as you suggest?
Click to expand...

One should not act for the sake of acting, you'll end up with domestic spying programs, amnesty, and more expensive healthcare. ;)



What I get from this is that Verizon (and co) would have been wise to leave well enough alone.
Click to expand...


Did you read any of my links? what they did in this case wasn't as out of line as it was made to seem.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
One should not act for the sake of acting, you'll end up with domestic spying programs, amnesty, and more expensive healthcare. ;)
Click to expand...

So that would be a "no." See, that's what happens when you refuse to be a part of the solution: you have to accept the one that somebody else creates for you. If Republicans don't craft their own bill protecting NN then we'll get the one the Democrats propose, just as Republicans refused to be a part of the healthcare reform process and we got the PPACA.

ReverendHellh0und said:
you read any of my links? what they did in this case wasn't as out of line as it was made to seem.
Click to expand...
 
ModerateGOP said:
It has not been proven to me, that the ISPs currently do this. I need to see proof that ISPs have throttled data in that case. As far as my research goes, they only do this after you hit data caps.
Click to expand...

Welll, it was proven that it was done previously by ISPs (comcast was proven to be doing it with P2P traffic). However, there's no indication it's actually occuring currently. However, companies have argued that they should essentially be able to do this in their briefs challenging the FCC's net neutrality guidelines. I believe it was Verizon argued that they should have the ability to discriminate against any data going over their network for any reason they choose, not just for legitimate concerns of network congestion as the guidelines required.

The issue isn't so much that net neutrality is absolutely being stomped on today, but rather that there have been indications over the past 10 years of telecoms taking a step on it or expressing an interest in taking such steps and there's reason to believe that they will continue down that direction at a more furious pace as government regulation to the contrary is removed and the solidification of their psuedo-monopolies continue.
 
Cardinal said:
Well we could have just stuck with the previous FCC regulation, but Verizon successfully sued the FCC which means another way has to be found to preserve NN. If you can think of another way to get NN back besides reclassifying internet service as a utility, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

Get congress to pass a law basically codifying the former FCC regulation into law, thus giving the FCC legitimate authority to enforce that SPECIFIC set of regulation without providing them far broader ability to regulate the industry that classifying them as a utility would do.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
There is the democrat proposal to control the internet called "Net Neutrality" I am against that bill.
Click to expand...

What bill is that? I haven't heard of an actual bill proposed by Democrats on this. I've heard of the President pushing the FCC to make it a utility, but that's not a bill. What am I missing here?

-edit-
ReverendHellh0und said:
Do you realize, that if passed the democrat party bill would kill netflix? lol

"The legislation, known as the Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act, would require that the FCC bar broadband carriers from selling so-called Internet fast lanes. For instance, Netflix would not be able to pay AT&T for faster delivery of its data packets to users than the data packets from smaller, competing internet video service that may not be able to pay for “premium” carriage."

netflix paid comcast for a direct pipe.

Senate Democrats propose bill that would force FCC to enforce net neutrality | VentureBeat | Media | by Mark Sullivan
Click to expand...

Ahhh, that bill. I'm actually not sure if the bill in question would actually do what you fear...simply because I don't think those writing the bill may actually understand what Netflix/Comcast are doing, and as such what their doing (interchange agreement) wouldn't actually be affected by such legislation. I'd need to look at the legislation closer though.
 
Zyphlin said:
What bill is that? I haven't heard of an actual bill proposed by Democrats on this. I've heard of the President pushing the FCC to make it a utility, but that's not a bill. What am I missing here?

-edit-


Ahhh, that bill. I'm actually not sure if the bill in question would actually do what you fear...simply because I don't think those writing the bill may actually understand what Netflix/Comcast are doing, and as such what their doing (interchange agreement) wouldn't actually be affected by such legislation. I'd need to look at the legislation closer though.
Click to expand...




It opens the doors. that's all.
 
Cardinal said:
So that would be a "no." See, that's what happens when you refuse to be a part of the solution: you have to accept the one that somebody else creates for you. If Republicans don't craft their own bill protecting NN then we'll get the one the Democrats propose, just as Republicans refused to be a part of the healthcare reform process and we got the PPACA.
Click to expand...



Don't be daft. Republicans and democrats will craft a bill that helps them line thier pockets.
 
Zyphlin said:
Get congress to pass a law basically codifying the former FCC regulation into law, thus giving the FCC legitimate authority to enforce that SPECIFIC set of regulation without providing them far broader ability to regulate the industry that classifying them as a utility would do.
Click to expand...

I would support that. Unfortunately the situation we have is that one party is proposing a solution whereas the other party is proposing no solution at all, and all of them probably don't understand the internet very well at all anyway.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Don't be daft. Republicans and democrats will craft a bill that helps them line thier pockets.
Click to expand...

I don't know that classifying the internet as a utility will do that. Do you know something I don't know to suggest it will?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Show me a utility that is not taxed, or has "fees" tacked on. just one.
Click to expand...

Or pork or holes. That's what I'm worried about. Whatever bill is passed will be useless because this topic is too political and not based on technical things.
 
Cardinal said:
I would support that. Unfortunately the situation we have is that one party is proposing a solution whereas the other party is proposing no solution at all, and all of them probably don't understand the internet very well at all anyway.
Click to expand...

Corporation destruction of network neutrality isn't going to happen over night. The issue is just beginning to truly get mainstream saturation in the past year or so. There's no need to absolutely, positively, without question act now if that action is wrong....and the utility option has a lot of potential to be wrong.

I disgree with doing nothing, I also disagree with doing a utility option right now....the best realistic option is to push over the next 2 to 5 years for it being codified into law
 
Zyphlin said:
Welll, it was proven that it was done previously by ISPs (comcast was proven to be doing it with P2P traffic). However, there's no indication it's actually occuring currently. However, companies have argued that they should essentially be able to do this in their briefs challenging the FCC's net neutrality guidelines. I believe it was Verizon argued that they should have the ability to discriminate against any data going over their network for any reason they choose, not just for legitimate concerns of network congestion as the guidelines required.

The issue isn't so much that net neutrality is absolutely being stomped on today, but rather that there have been indications over the past 10 years of telecoms taking a step on it or expressing an interest in taking such steps and there's reason to believe that they will continue down that direction at a more furious pace as government regulation to the contrary is removed and the solidification of their psuedo-monopolies continue.
Click to expand...

Besides for web hosting, I know of no legit reason to use P2P. Transferring files through P2P does slow down the rest of your internet. That's how that works. Try downloading a bunch (20 or so at a time) of 700 MB movie files from a cloud server and then watching Netflix. Can't be done on my 75/75 MB line. Usually it's the server that times out. So it's impossible to do that any other way. I've searched for alternatives to my favorite downloader Internet Download Manager, but none does what it is great at. It basically takes apart the files, and puts them back together. Scrambling the data allowing you to bypass most ISP monitoring. Most of the other software out there, downloads the file directly and then ISP can still see what you are doing. In the case of IDM, ISP only knows you are transfeering GBs of unknown data. Yet, using both methods, you can't download a bunch without timing out other applications. The Technology doesn't exist yet but we are getting there. Making any NN bill that Congress can throw together in the next four years absolutely useless. Unless if it was so restricting of the very freedom these advocates are fighting to "save."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom