• 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!

FCC votes to repeal net neutrality rules

What's going to happen is the ISP's are going to charge HULU, NETFLIX and other streaming services directly to use their ISP connections to you. Then of course the cable ISP's will undercut those prices if you just bundled with their cable package. They are out to punish cord cutters in this manner and get them back on their billing roles. This of course will make the streaming services have to raise their prices to you.

The bolded is what they really want. That is akin to google advertising style money. I'd guarantee that they've already been collecting all that info but like you said, now they will be able to legally admit it and then sell it off to any and everyone.

Another proud victory for Trump - he drained a little more of the voters pocketbooks.

Believing all regulations are bad is some seriously sick thinking.

Maybe we’ll get to still use google earth to watch our water and air being polluted by companies that no longer try to hide it.
 
The argument against: Internet service providers will now be allowed to speed up or slow down different companies' data, and charge consumers according to the services they access.

The argument for: Corporations would never enter into contract agreements with internet service providers to use such dastardly tactics against rivals. And if they did, you can just switch your ISP to...um...the other one in your locale.

There is no thinking behind any of this legislature. They are pretty much only looking to see what Obama did, reversing it, and calling it good policy.



The argument against:
Providers should be able to traffic shape to alleviate congestion if a service is overusing the capacity of the pipe. the alternative is everyone suffering.
The internet flourished without NN rules in place.
There is no example of any provider throttling a service that was not dealt with by fines (one case). even without the NN rules.
Providers should be able to offer discount plans such as ATT's gophone unlimited and be allowed to limit video to a certain bandwith to make the option profitable.
T-mobile's "binge on" would be illegal, which allows people to use certain services as a discount without using up data plans.



The argument for:
Give government title II control over the industry to eventually tax
Give government control over content and innovation.
 
Another proud victory for Trump - he drained a little more of the voters pocketbooks.

Believing all regulations are bad is some seriously sick thinking.

Maybe we’ll get to still use google earth to watch our water and air being polluted by companies that no longer try to hide it.

It's more trickle down ideology. Deregulate corporations and they will magnanimously take care of us in the manner that's best for us.
 
But prior to NN rules it did not happen, why would it suddenly happen now that rules for something that never happen go away?

Actually...

1) A widely cited example of a violation of net neutrality principles was the Internet service provider Comcast's secret slowing ("throttling") of uploads from peer-to-peer file sharing (P2P) applications by using forged packets. Comcast did not stop blocking these protocols, like BitTorrent, until the FCC ordered them to stop.

2) In another minor example, The Madison River Communications company was fined US$15,000 by the FCC, in 2004, for restricting their customers' access to Vonage, which was rivaling their own services.

3) AT&T was also caught limiting access to FaceTime, so only those users who paid for AT&T's new shared data plans could access the application.

4) In July 2017, Verizon Wireless was accused of throttling after users noticed that videos played on Netflix and Youtube were slower than usual, though Verizon commented that it was conducting "network testing" and that net neutrality rules permit "reasonable network management practices".


The GOP has argued ever since Obama dropped the hammer that this is yet another unnecessary regulation and yet another example of government oversight. Well, now the FCC has determined that all the before mentioned (and oh so much more) is perfectly legal for the future. Like what the Brits did with Brexit after the vote, I suspect that Americans everywhere are Googling up what NN even means. I only cared to find out about it over Thanksgiving week when my 22-year old was freaking out over it. But, as we all know, since the GOP sees this as a "victory," FOX News will play their part, and Conservatives everywhere will ask, "what about Clinton?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality
 
Internet access is a near-monopoly due to massive barriers to entry.

Until that changes, we're going to be stuck with abusive practices inherent to any such situation.

This. Anyone who thinks this will create more competition is drinking the corporate kool-aid. Do they really think those internet providers want any more competition? :lol:
 
So then why change it if it's working? o_O

Corporate profit.

You guys seem to think this will open up the market and create more competition. Tell me this: Why on Earth would the top internet providers push for this move if they believed it would create more competition for them?
 
Here it comes, America!!

750x422

This is a portugal cell service offering so these sites don't count towards your data usage.

https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/
 
Actually...

1) A widely cited example of a violation of net neutrality principles was the Internet service provider Comcast's secret slowing ("throttling") of uploads from peer-to-peer file sharing (P2P) applications by using forged packets. Comcast did not stop blocking these protocols, like BitTorrent, until the FCC ordered them to stop.

2) In another minor example, The Madison River Communications company was fined US$15,000 by the FCC, in 2004, for restricting their customers' access to Vonage, which was rivaling their own services.

3) AT&T was also caught limiting access to FaceTime, so only those users who paid for AT&T's new shared data plans could access the application.

4) In July 2017, Verizon Wireless was accused of throttling after users noticed that videos played on Netflix and Youtube were slower than usual, though Verizon commented that it was conducting "network testing" and that net neutrality rules permit "reasonable network management practices".


The GOP has argued ever since Obama dropped the hammer that this is yet another unnecessary regulation and yet another example of government oversight. Well, now the FCC has determined that all the before mentioned (and oh so much more) is perfectly legal for the future. Like what the Brits did with Brexit after the vote, I suspect that Americans everywhere are Googling up what NN even means. I only cared to find out about it over Thanksgiving week when my 22-year old was freaking out over it. But, as we all know, since the GOP sees this as a "victory," FOX News will play their part, and Conservatives everywhere will ask, "what about Clinton?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality




1. "Comcast's interference, on the other hand, appears to be an aggressive way of managing its network to keep file-sharing traffic from swallowing too much bandwidth and affecting the Internet speeds of other subscribers." if they were not allowed to do this, they would have had much larger problems. traffic shaping is a viable network management tool.

2. so you are telling me without NN rules in place they got fined? What's the problem again that we would need NN then?

3. this is the gophone issue, in order to offer a cheaper unlimited plan they had to data manage, they came up with limiting video to 480p, facetime didn't support that. They should be allowed to do this on a cheaper plan.

4. was conducting "network testing" and that net neutrality rules permit "reasonable network management practices".



It didn't fly before NN what makes you think it will fly after? your examples prove this is a solution that wont work, for a problem that has never happened without being smacked down.
 
Actually...

1) A widely cited example of a violation of net neutrality principles was the Internet service provider Comcast's secret slowing ("throttling") of uploads from peer-to-peer file sharing (P2P) applications by using forged packets. Comcast did not stop blocking these protocols, like BitTorrent, until the FCC ordered them to stop.

2) In another minor example, The Madison River Communications company was fined US$15,000 by the FCC, in 2004, for restricting their customers' access to Vonage, which was rivaling their own services.

3) AT&T was also caught limiting access to FaceTime, so only those users who paid for AT&T's new shared data plans could access the application.

4) In July 2017, Verizon Wireless was accused of throttling after users noticed that videos played on Netflix and Youtube were slower than usual, though Verizon commented that it was conducting "network testing" and that net neutrality rules permit "reasonable network management practices".


The GOP has argued ever since Obama dropped the hammer that this is yet another unnecessary regulation and yet another example of government oversight. Well, now the FCC has determined that all the before mentioned (and oh so much more) is perfectly legal for the future. Like what the Brits did with Brexit after the vote, I suspect that Americans everywhere are Googling up what NN even means. I only cared to find out about it over Thanksgiving week when my 22-year old was freaking out over it. But, as we all know, since the GOP sees this as a "victory," FOX News will play their part, and Conservatives everywhere will ask, "what about Clinton?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

And all that is legal now. Thanks GOP! You guys suck.
 
The marketplace created the internet as we know it today. What is illogical is think some rule designating ISP's as utilities less than 2 years old added anything to the internet or would add anything to the internet.

DARPA created the internet as we know it today. Big gubamint made it happen.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is an agency of the United States Department of Defense responsible for the development of emerging technologies for use by the military.

DARPA-funded projects have provided significant technologies that influenced many non-military fields, such as computer networking and the basis for the modern Internet, and graphical user interfaces in information technology.​
 
And all that is legal now. Thanks GOP! You guys suck.



1. If they could not have done that, you would have problems getting on DP while your ilk dl's parody porn and disney movies.

2. this was in 2004 before NN rules, what makes you think it changes after them?

3. it was a discount unlimited plan. should they not be able to offer a discount plan that is designed for people not video centric? they could simply not offer the plan if NN stands. how is that a solution.

4. network testing.



So which one of these is causing you to lament?
 
Last edited:
1. If they could not have done that, you would have problems getting on DP while your ilk dl's parody porn and disney moveys.

What a load of ****. NN was in place and I got here just fine. And now you are going to pretend bandwidth is suddenly a problem that ISP's need to control for us? Farcical. BTW... conservatives consume porn at a much higher rate so that'd be YOUR ilk.

2. this wasin 2004 before NN rules, what makes you think it changes after them?

3. it was a discount unlimited plan. should they not be able to offer a discount plan that is designed for people not video centric? they could simply not offer the plan if NN stands. how is that a solution.

4. network testing.



So which one of these is causing you to lament?

Play dumb about it all you like... all the way up until you get socked with a fresh new style of billing due to you actually believing there is a bandwith problem ISP's need to control for you.
 
because there was never an indication that they would.

Well, let's see, doing the packaged deals would mean more profit. What is the ultimate goal for a corporation, again?
 
I smell potential lawsuits.

For what? They have The ability to do this. All a lawsuit does is give the same
Result with a ton of taxpayer dollars wasted fighting it.
 
Well, let's see, doing the packaged deals would mean more profit. What is the ultimate goal for a corporation, again?



Packaged deals require managment and overhead. can you show me one, ISP that's even floated the idea?
 
What "abusive practices"?

Internet and tv prices are insane.
The reason is that there is only one or two providers in town.
Your cable company or phone company.

That is like I can't get Verizon fios because att owns the lines here.

I have att unversed but it is bad compared to over services.

Spectrum or charter sucks as always and brigthouse was way too expensive so I am stuck.

I might have a choice once Verizon begins rolling out the mm wave stuff but that is going to be years away.
 
What a load of ****. NN was in place and I got here just fine. And now you are going to pretend bandwidth is suddenly a problem that ISP's need to control for us? Farcical. BTW... conservatives consume porn at a much higher rate so that'd be YOUR ilk.


1. this was in reference to msgt's post. if a service eats up all the end user's bandwith without traffic shaping the entire connection for end users suffer. Do you remember when cable first came out, it would slow down everyone around 3pm? Kids were getting on the xboxes and the xboxes were taking all the bandwith they could. (microsoft actually throttles it now so that it works better for end users). what solved that issue, was.... wait for it.... traffic shaping.


Play dumb about it all you like... all the way up until you get socked with a fresh new style of billing due to you actually believing there is a bandwith problem ISP's need to control for you.


Play dumb? I am literally the smartest person on DP on this topic. I can program the routers to prioritize, shape, and manage traffic. I know why you need prioritization and what the difference between "net neutrality" and "Net Neutrality" is. its you luddites who go of half cocked on technology you don't understand getting all bent out of shape when someone doesn't fall in line with the talking points you were given.


You failed to address my 2-4 because you are ignorant on the topic but speak on it like you know. you don;'t
 
Internet and tv prices are insane.

24 bucks for internet is "insane"? how much should internet cost?

The reason is that there is only one or two providers in town.
Your cable company or phone company.

How many wires do you want running to your house and through your town to get internet?


That is like I can't get Verizon fios because att owns the lines here.

I have att unversed but it is bad compared to over services.

Spectrum or charter sucks as always and brigthouse was way too expensive so I am stuck.

Why do they suck?

I might have a choice once Verizon begins rolling out the mm wave stuff but that is going to be years away.


how doe NN address any of this?
 
FCC votes to repeal net neutrality rules

not surprising. the vast majority of Americans support net neutrality, so i hope that the republican party pays a heavy price at the polls. the bumbling democrats had better mobilize on this.
 
24 bucks for internet is "insane"? how much should internet cost?
My att bill was 165 for the mid grade tv services and 6mb internet. Until I called and complained I got it lowered 40 bucks and received 10mb internet. Spectrum prices are worse.

How many wires do you want running to your house and through your town to get internet?
I want decent service at a reasonable price without all the BS. THat is why these people freak and sue over google.

Why do they suck?

High prices, unreliable service tons of upcharges. My mother-in-law has them. She called in about something and
One of their reps added a ton of crap to her bill she never ordered. She has to call back and get it taken off.



how doe NN address any of this?

Mm wave is getting up to 10gig or more depending on distance.
It offers solid competition and gives people more option than just 2.

They were horrible back in 2000 when I was working in the industry. The only difference between then and now is that they are just bigger.
 
My att bill was 165 for the mid grade tv services and 6mb internet. Until I called and complained I got it lowered 40 bucks and received 10mb internet. Spectrum prices are worse.


I want decent service at a reasonable price without all the BS. THat is why these people freak and sue over google.


Waut so 40 bucks is too high?


igh prices, unreliable service tons of upcharges. My mother-in-law has them. She called in about something and
One of their reps added a ton of crap to her bill she never ordered. She has to call back and get it taken off.





Mm wave is getting up to 10gig or more depending on distance.
It offers solid competition and gives people more option than just 2.

They were horrible back in 2000 when I was working in the industry. The only difference between then and now is that they are just bigger.



how is NN going to change this for you?
 
The argument against:
Providers should be able to traffic shape to alleviate congestion if a service is overusing the capacity of the pipe.
They can. It's perfectly legal for them to charge for bandwidth over a certain amount or even slow bandwidth speed if you go over a certain amount with net neutrality in place. In fact, that method of regulating capacity is MUCH better than an opaque system where companies are charging both sides of the pipe and those costs are being passed on to consumers via charges from content providers.

The internet flourished without NN rules in place.
Which benefits large established companies over new brands that don't have same subscriber base. You are basically putting into place an internet where someone like AOL or Yahoo would have the resources to pay for quicker searches than superior tech like Google.

There is no example of any provider throttling a service that was not dealt with by fines (one case). even without the NN rules.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/...-and-netflix-reach-a-streaming-agreement.html
Streaming service providers has changed rapidly recently in scale and popularity. It's starting to become apparent it is how entertainment will be accessed in homes.
 
Back
Top Bottom