• 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!

Net Neutrality Goes Into Effect

jonny5

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
27,581
Reaction score
4,664
Location
Republic of Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
As of Friday, June 12, the Internet is legally an open, unbiased network in the United States. Well, to be fair, it has been pretty open and unbiased, but now the net neutrality ruling is coming into effect.

Net neutrality rules were published by the Federal Communications Commission April 13, and the two-month waiting period for them to become effective ends today. The ruling is being appealed by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like AT&T T +0.46% and Verizon, which will likely take months if not years if it has to go to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, ISPs asked the courts to halt parts of the ruling until there is a verdict on the appeal (in legal terms, this halt request is called a stay request), but that request was denied today. So net neutrality now becomes enforceable by the FCC. Will consumers benefit?

Net Neutrality Goes Into Effect: What Consumers Should Expect - Forbes

If you havent already you can read the entire 400 pages of rulings by the FCC where they unilaterally declared that they have the power to regulate the internet.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

Not a court, or a democratically chosen body, but a bunch of bureaucrats. But anyway, its too late. The internet is now under the observation of the US govt and theyve come to help. Expect higher prices, stifled innovation, and govt monopolies.
 
Net Neutrality Goes Into Effect: What Consumers Should Expect - Forbes

If you havent already you can read the entire 400 pages of rulings by the FCC where they unilaterally declared that they have the power to regulate the internet.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

Not a court, or a democratically chosen body, but a bunch of bureaucrats. But anyway, its too late. The internet is now under the observation of the US govt and theyve come to help. Expect higher prices, stifled innovation, and govt monopolies.

Good. Now comcast can't regulate it against us.
 
Net Neutrality Goes Into Effect: What Consumers Should Expect - Forbes

If you havent already you can read the entire 400 pages of rulings by the FCC where they unilaterally declared that they have the power to regulate the internet.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

Not a court, or a democratically chosen body, but a bunch of bureaucrats. But anyway, its too late. The internet is now under the observation of the US govt and theyve come to help. Expect higher prices, stifled innovation, and govt monopolies.

But the biggest thing to expect is the same recycled, factually challenged talking points.
 
Not a court, or a democratically chosen body, but a bunch of bureaucrats. But anyway, its too late. The internet is now under the observation of the US govt and theyve come to help. Expect higher prices, stifled innovation
Exactly, if ISPs only have each other to compete against, why would they bother trying to be better than the other guy to win over his customer?
What's in it for the ISPs?
Why should the ISPs try to get more customers (and thus mo'money) now that there's "Net neutrality"?

govt monopolies.
:roll:
 
Well, if it is unilaterally declared by a bureaucracy, it won't be hard for a future administration to reverse it.
 
Well, if it is unilaterally declared by a bureaucracy, it won't be hard for a future administration to reverse it.

You do realize that the reason this was unilaterally declared was because the general public raised a stink about the issue to the point where it could not be ignored? Now imagine what will happen if it is 'reversed' by a future administration.
 
What's that buzz, I hear in the background, are they monitoring us NOW!:mrgreen:
 
You do realize that the reason this was unilaterally declared was because the general public raised a stink about the issue to the point where it could not be ignored? Now imagine what will happen if it is 'reversed' by a future administration.

Just wait until the serious "regulation" starts. Those same people will be squealing like pigs. Give the government a handful of power and it will take an arm load.
 
Net Neutrality Goes Into Effect: What Consumers Should Expect - Forbes

If you havent already you can read the entire 400 pages of rulings by the FCC where they unilaterally declared that they have the power to regulate the internet.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

Not a court, or a democratically chosen body, but a bunch of bureaucrats. But anyway, its too late. The internet is now under the observation of the US govt and theyve come to help. Expect higher prices, stifled innovation, and govt monopolies.

Of course, the actual issue of Network Neutrality being considered now at the FCC bears little resemblance to the caricature being presented on Fox News. In reality, Net Neutrality is a fundamental principle that has been part of the Internet since its inception.

Net Neutrality means no discrimination, and it protects Internet users' ability to do or download whatever they want online without interference from the phone or cable company.

A series of awful decisions at the FCC during the Bush administration put Net Neutrality in jeopardy, and some in Congress tried to eliminate it in 2006. But over the past three years, more than 1.7 million Americans have contacted Congress and the FCC about the issue.

Take a look at the FCC docket, and you'll see thousands and thousands of comments from average people who are using the open Internet to start small businesses, organize in their communities, or just communicate with the world.

A broad coalition of groups spanning the political spectrum from the National Organization for Women to the Christian Coalition to the ACLU and the American Library Association has joined the fight for the free and open Internet alongside every major U.S. consumer group, large and small Internet companies, and even the inventor of the World Wide Web. A hallmark of the effort has been its broad, nonpartisan nature.

Creeping socialism? Hardly.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-aaron/why-the-right-is-wrong-ab_b_424023.html
 
Of course, the actual issue of Network Neutrality being considered now at the FCC bears little resemblance to the caricature being presented on Fox News. In reality, Net Neutrality is a fundamental principle that has been part of the Internet since its inception.

Net Neutrality means no discrimination, and it protects Internet users' ability to do or download whatever they want online without interference from the phone or cable company.

A series of awful decisions at the FCC during the Bush administration put Net Neutrality in jeopardy, and some in Congress tried to eliminate it in 2006. But over the past three years, more than 1.7 million Americans have contacted Congress and the FCC about the issue.

Take a look at the FCC docket, and you'll see thousands and thousands of comments from average people who are using the open Internet to start small businesses, organize in their communities, or just communicate with the world.

A broad coalition of groups spanning the political spectrum from the National Organization for Women to the Christian Coalition to the ACLU and the American Library Association has joined the fight for the free and open Internet alongside every major U.S. consumer group, large and small Internet companies, and even the inventor of the World Wide Web. A hallmark of the effort has been its broad, nonpartisan nature.

Creeping socialism? Hardly.

Why the Right Is Wrong About Net Neutrality | Craig Aaron

And how well would they be downloading whatever they want without the cable company who built the internet?
 
You do realize that the reason this was unilaterally declared was because the general public raised a stink about the issue to the point where it could not be ignored? Now imagine what will happen if it is 'reversed' by a future administration.

No, I dont realize that. The general public, as always, has been clueless on nearly everything that goes on. A few million commented on the FCC rules, and we have over 200 million internet users. What more likely happened was some bureacrats at the FCC didnt like that some communications were going on without their consent.
 
Just wait until the serious "regulation" starts. Those same people will be squealing like pigs. Give the government a handful of power and it will take an arm load.

Fear mongering is so 2002.

No, I dont realize that. The general public, as always, has been clueless on nearly everything that goes on. A few million commented on the FCC rules, and we have over 200 million internet users. What more likely happened was some bureacrats at the FCC didnt like that some communications were going on without their consent.

This is absolute nonsense. When you actually understand the issue, please come back? It's kind of silly to argue that this is about 'communications' happening without consent.
 
Slightly off topic, I actually wondered if the phrase "Obamanet" was something I came up with just now in my head. Hahaha, how silly of me. A trip to google cured me of that conceit pretty quickly.
 
Now there is a logical debate response. I don't deal in fear, just experience.

When your argument is the gubmint c'min fer ya interwebz, it's fear mongering. I won't apologize for not taking it seriously. :shrug:
 
Fear mongering is so 2002.



This is absolute nonsense. When you actually understand the issue, please come back? It's kind of silly to argue that this is about 'communications' happening without consent.

Ad hominem.
 
Ad hominem.

Report it if you feel like it. It's clear to anybody with even a layman's knowledge of the issue that you have no clue what it is you're discussing.
 
When your argument is the gubmint c'min fer ya interwebz, it's fear mongering. I won't apologize for not taking it seriously. :shrug:

And you aren't likely to like what you see in a couple of years relative to the internet. The federal government is capable of making anything worse and it usually does.
 
And you aren't likely to like what you see in a couple of years relative to the internet. The federal government is capable of making anything worse and it usually does.

Does the "fm" in your name stand for fear mongering? Call me when you have something a little bit more substantial? Thanks.
 
Does the "fm" in your name stand for fear mongering? Call me when you have something a little bit more substantial? Thanks.

The small government/laissez faire crowd fear mongers 24/7 about everything. Every legislation is an end of the Republic as we know it every year is the verge of a global financial meltdown.
 
Hopefully the new rules will give ISP's the opportunity to block repeat DDOS offenders.
 
My biggest fear is that now that the FCC has their foot in the door, they'll eventually impose decency standards and censorship on the internet like they do on radio and television. I hope that never happens, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit. You probably want to be careful what you wish for when the FCC and government is involved.
 
Last edited:
And how well would they be downloading whatever they want without the cable company who built the internet?

I'm sorry j5, but I'm not sure I understand the point of the question?
 
Back
Top Bottom