• 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!

Verizon admits to throttling video in apparent violation of net neutrality

Renae said:
There is no competitive internet in your world. innovation is hamstrung. You want fast lane for everyone but don't have a clue or care how that's going to happen. You jut think some legislative wishfulness can make magic.
Click to expand...

What a load of bull****. Get back with me when you understand the issue. I recommend listening to the Stuff You Should Know podcast on net neutrality from howstuffworks.com.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
I seem to distinctly remember being on this site before the government suddenly asserted a right to regulate under title II
Click to expand...



EMNofSeattle said:
I distinctly remember not caring.

Netflix destroyed an entire industry, why do you expect me to shed a few tears over the fact they have to negotiate for data? That gets right to the heart of the matter, net neutrality was not an issue until some corporations with financial backing didn't want to pay market price for the services they're consuming.
Click to expand...

How come every opponent of Net Neutrality has this same, fundamentally flawed picture of what Net Neutrality actually is?

First: Net Neutrality was the standard previously. Your internet has always worked this way. And it worked great, yes? It's only recently that this has changed, thanks to ISP lobbying mostly.

Next: Net Neutrality doesn't mean Netflix gets free bandwidth, or discount bandwidth. I don't know who fed you guys this dumb idea, but it's wrong. Netflix pays for every megabyte they transfer under Net Neutrality, as does the consumer on the other end receiving that stream. They still negotiate the price of that bandwidth like anyone else.

What Net Neutrality actually does is make it so Comcast can't just arbitrarily throttle Netflix to a crawl to push people to their own video streaming service. I paid for 50mbps, Netflix pays for some ungodly amount of bandwidth, and both of us should get it, don't you think? Why should Comcast be allowed to just slow down the connection that was already paid for on both sides?

That's all Net Neutrality is. A megabyte is a megabyte whether it comes from Debate Politics or Amazon.

Now, before some guy more familiar with the structure of the internet smugly chimes in: No, actually, Net Neutrality doesn't prevent ISPs from throttling traffic as necessary to preserve user experience or the integrity of the network. If Netflix's traffic saturates a particular line or set of lines, they still can throttle it or reroute it as needed.
 
Renae said:
EXCEPT THAT IS NOT WHAT THE INTERNET IS LOGISTICALLY.

You're on a kick that's wrong wrong wrong.

Let's say, your Helix ISP is a major player in the ISP world.
I got Renae's Vids, a netflix type streaming service

And EMN is a subscriber to my service. I have to use part of your network to deliver my streams.

In your fantasy world, the cost of streaming the new all 4k uncompressed movies my service offers, well it's just something you have to bare. You have a data capacity of let's call it 100 g/s (gigabytes per second) And suddenly my service is eating 40-50% of your available bandwidth. That's pushing you to redline in terms of capacity.

By YOUR worldview, the cost of upgrading, of increasing bandwidth is on YOU. You alone. You'd have to start jacking the cost of your service up to pay for it. There is a point you charge more than the market can bare and a competitor arises, suddenly your market shares start to fall, and well you get the picture.

In the real world you come to me and say "hey woah, this is getting out of hand, you want to push that much data, you gotta help cover the cost of it." Which is what that Netflix, comcast hubub was all about, which was resolved without government regulation.

Net Neutrality (like you want) is like communism, it's great on paper, get's the free loaders cheering but in practice, brings everyone down.


Look, let's make this simple.
Click to expand...

You have a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of Net Neutrality. That 100g/s isn't ****ing free under Net Neutrality and I have absolutely no idea how you got it in your head that it is.
 
ajn678 said:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/21/...-throttling-statement-net-neutrality-title-ii


People that were against net neutrality said this wouldn't be a thing only a few weeks ago, and yet it seems Verizon is already doing it. Do these same people actually believe that companies won't continue to do this and worse if they are given the legality to do so?
Click to expand...

What, the Obama administration didn't eff up enough of America ? Running our healthcare system into the ground wasn't enough ? His attempt to declare the internet as a public utility and regulate it was just another attempt to grow Govt and ruin something thats been fine for years
 
https://fee.org/articles/net-neutrality-is-about-government-control-of-the-internet/


" The “Open Internet Order” (OIO) regulating the Internet, passed by the FCC in 2015, would have moved the Internet in the direction favored by net neutrality ideologues. In the text of the OIO, the George Soros-funded net neutrality group Free Press was mentioned 46 times – it's almost as if Free Press had written the regulations for the FCC. The OIO sees the Internet as something that should be nationalized by the government to be run like a public utility.

Advocates of this vision, including leaders of Free Press, have made it clear what they want. Robert McChesney, one of the founders of Free Press, stated,

" What we want to have in the US and in every society is an Internet that is not private property, but a public utility. We want an Internet where you don’t have to have a password and that you don’t pay a penny to use. It is your right to use the Internet."

The goal they are calling “net neutrality” is to have the federal government, and governments around the world, in control of the Internet. McChesney stated further,

At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies. We are not at that point yet. But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.
 
ajn678 said:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/21/...-throttling-statement-net-neutrality-title-ii


People that were against net neutrality said this wouldn't be a thing only a few weeks ago, and yet it seems Verizon is already doing it. Do these same people actually believe that companies won't continue to do this and worse if they are given the legality to do so?
Click to expand...

I haven't followed the net neutrality debate much... but I don't see what is wrong with Verizon throttling traffic going through their lines. If Netflix is using more of Verizon's capacity, Netflix should pay more for the usage. If you use the roads to support your business, you are paying more through taxes than the average individual. Same with the roads of the internet, I would say.
 
Helix said:
What a load of bull****. Get back with me when you understand the issue. I recommend listening to the Stuff You Should Know podcast on net neutrality from howstuffworks.com.
Click to expand...

Why would I bother with something that obviously failing you?
 
Fenton said:
https://fee.org/articles/net-neutrality-is-about-government-control-of-the-internet/


" The “Open Internet Order” (OIO) regulating the Internet, passed by the FCC in 2015, would have moved the Internet in the direction favored by net neutrality ideologues. In the text of the OIO, the George Soros-funded net neutrality group Free Press was mentioned 46 times – it's almost as if Free Press had written the regulations for the FCC. The OIO sees the Internet as something that should be nationalized by the government to be run like a public utility.

Advocates of this vision, including leaders of Free Press, have made it clear what they want. Robert McChesney, one of the founders of Free Press, stated,

" What we want to have in the US and in every society is an Internet that is not private property, but a public utility. We want an Internet where you don’t have to have a password and that you don’t pay a penny to use. It is your right to use the Internet."

The goal they are calling “net neutrality” is to have the federal government, and governments around the world, in control of the Internet. McChesney stated further,

At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies. We are not at that point yet. But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.
Click to expand...

They can call it a Ham Sandwich, that doesn't make it one. Net neutrality is not nationalization of the Internet.
 
buck said:
I haven't followed the net neutrality debate much... but I don't see what is wrong with Verizon throttling traffic going through their lines. If Netflix is using more of Verizon's capacity, Netflix should pay more for the usage. If you use the roads to support your business, you are paying more through taxes than the average individual. Same with the roads of the internet, I would say.
Click to expand...

Netflix does pay more for the usage. Why does literally every single person against Net Neutrality think it means free bandwidth? Jesus.
 
Renae said:
Why would I bother with something that obviously failing you?
Click to expand...

Says the person who believes Net Neutrality means free bandwidth.
 
Renae said:
Why would I bother with something that obviously failing you?
Click to expand...

Why should you bother learning about the issue? Because this is a debate. Either way, it's fine. I don't see much hope of common ground.
 
Helix said:
Why should you bother learning about the issue? Because this is a debate. Either way, it's fine. I don't see much hope of common ground.
Click to expand...

Helix, I have studied the issue. I wholly disagree with your stance not out of ignorance, which you heavily imply, but rather a studied view of the reality of the situation. You fear an internet that won't ever happen. Period. Economically it makes no sense for the number of players involved.
 
Renae said:
Helix, I have studied the issue. I wholly disagree with your stance not out of ignorance, which you heavily imply, but rather a studied view of the reality of the situation. You fear an internet that won't ever happen. Period. Economically it makes no sense for the number of players involved.
Click to expand...

We'll agree to disagree, then. Snarkiness aside, I do highly recommend that podcast (not necessarily that episode first.) They've been doing it since 2008 or so, and have covered some fascinating topics. I also really like Stuff You Missed in History Class.
 
Renae said:
Helix, I have studied the issue. I wholly disagree with your stance not out of ignorance, which you heavily imply, but rather a studied view of the reality of the situation. You fear an internet that won't ever happen. Period. Economically it makes no sense for the number of players involved.
Click to expand...

You haven't studied anything, obviously, as you possess a fundamentally inaccurate picture of what net neutrality even is.

We also now have more than one example of the "players" doing the throttling people like myself fear. Wont ever happen, eh?
 
buck said:
I haven't followed the net neutrality debate much... but I don't see what is wrong with Verizon throttling traffic going through their lines. If Netflix is using more of Verizon's capacity, Netflix should pay more for the usage. If you use the roads to support your business, you are paying more through taxes than the average individual. Same with the roads of the internet, I would say.
Click to expand...

That's not how the internet works.
 
Deuce said:
Netflix does pay more for the usage. Why does literally every single person against Net Neutrality think it means free bandwidth? Jesus.
Click to expand...

I'm neither for or against... but apparently Netflix doesn't pay enough to cover the costs to supply. The answer may be per usage fees. You have Netflix (which I do - and love it) you will use more video and will pay more. Basically, either Netflix pays more for bandwidth and charges the customer more.. or the customers pays per usage fees to cover their increased usage. I suspect we are all going to be on the later in the not too distant future.
 
buck said:
I'm neither for or against... but apparently Netflix doesn't pay enough to cover the costs to supply. The answer may be per usage fees. You have Netflix (which I do - and love it) you will use more video and will pay more. Basically, either Netflix pays more for bandwidth and charges the customer more.. or the customers pays per usage fees to cover their increased usage. I suspect we are all going to be on the later in the not too distant future.
Click to expand...

That's something to work out via negotiations like any other customer.

But to arbitrarily slow down the traffic so as to render Netflix unusuable, even when the capacity to deliver the traffic is already present and the current contract is already in force purely as a negotiating tactic for better rates... that's acceptable to you?
 
Deuce said:
That's something to work out via negotiations like any other customer.

But to arbitrarily slow down the traffic so as to render Netflix unusuable, even when the capacity to deliver the traffic is already present and the current contract is already in force purely as a negotiating tactic for better rates... that's acceptable to you?
Click to expand...

You don't need net neutrality to enforce contract law.
 
ajn678 said:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/21/...-throttling-statement-net-neutrality-title-ii


People that were against net neutrality said this wouldn't be a thing only a few weeks ago, and yet it seems Verizon is already doing it. Do these same people actually believe that companies won't continue to do this and worse if they are given the legality to do so?
Click to expand...

Well, I've had a career in communications in the past, and I don't read the Verizon statement as throttling. Admitting "to some customers" probably has to do with their rate plan. What I notice in my area is slowdown with WiFi. I have CAT 5 to in my home, and I notice a difference sometimes when I don't plug in the laptop to my wireless. I only have an active wireless for my laptop, and my immediate next door neighbor. They experience slowdowns often, and I never do.

The thing with wireless, is there is only so much bandwidth available, and you are competing with all your neighbors with wireless!

It is possible they have poorly designed systems that cannot handle all the needed data as well.
 
Oborosen said:
Or how about Amazon Prime and such with their voice activated remotes, letting the government use the mic to monitor you without you're consent. Or charging you to remove that option in the first place.
Click to expand...

I am important. People care about what I do. Really important people want to watch me. This is not me convincing myself I am important. I really am that important.
 
I don't have Comcast, not Verizon. I have three smart TV's one of which is a 4K. Never has issues streaming to all, except when Netflix itself is having server problems. I have even streamed five videos at the same time on my three 1440p monitors.
 
Deuce said:
That's something to work out via negotiations like any other customer.

But to arbitrarily slow down the traffic so as to render Netflix unusuable, even when the capacity to deliver the traffic is already present and the current contract is already in force purely as a negotiating tactic for better rates... that's acceptable to you?
Click to expand...
It's absolutely acceptable. Is Netflix putting blockbuster and Hollywood video out of business acceptable to you?

Using someone else's infrastructure is subject to their conditions, and the real issue is, Netflix was using more capacity then anyone else
 
Geoist said:
Verizon has to be one of the worst of the major American companies. I don't think I had a worse experience with a business up until I dropped them in the mid-2000s. Really don't understand why they are still so dominant.
Click to expand...

"It's the network."
 
EMNofSeattle said:
It's absolutely acceptable. Is Netflix putting blockbuster and Hollywood video out of business acceptable to you?

Using someone else's infrastructure is subject to their conditions, and the real issue is, Netflix was using more capacity then anyone else
Click to expand...

The bottom line of this is I agree with Deuce (which is rare in our normal debates.) If I pay for a guaranteed 60 gigabit/sec, then there should be no throttling. And you know what... I have seen no evidence any provider is throttling. Accusations, yes. But I have seen terrible slowing of data in wireless connections, but never on my hard wired...

Tell me...

How many of these people complaining are using wireless, and how m any are hard wired?

To add...

I don't know without looking for it what my $63.95/month to Comcast gives me. I wish the price was cheaper, but I am rather happy with my service otherwise.

I just did a speedtest dot net test:

6478546941.png


I get great speeds, but the only place I don't realize them is with my laptop, using the wifi...

I have next door neighbors who aren't as blessed with money as I am, so I give them access to my wifi. Their speeds are downright sluggish at times. The wifi is capable of very fast speeds. The problem is, there are only so many channels and several near by competing wifi users in the neighborhood.

I suspect this is the root problem with those who complain.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom