Internet businesses ask U.S. to keep net neutrality rules

[CMPancake]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-of-each-others-cloud-services-idUSKBN1DS0TO

The whole basis of Ashit Pi's argument for killing your internet is built on the false premise that repealing Net Neutrality protections would allow businesses to thrive. If that were the case, why are so Businesses that have innovated and thrived over the Internet like AirBnB, Netflix, Amazon, Etsy, and Reddit oppose the repeal of Net Neutrality?

AirBnb, Reddit, Shutterstock, Inc, Tumblr, Etsy (ETSY.O), Twitter (TWTR.N) and a long list of small internet companies urged the Federal Communications Commission on Monday to scrap a plan to roll back net neutrality rules.

The companies, which sent the letter on Cyber Monday to coincide with the biggest online shopping day of the year, argued that slowing access to content, called “throttling,” or blocking it altogether, would hurt the U.S. economy.

“This would put small and medium-sized businesses at a disadvantage and prevent innovative new ones from even getting off the ground,” the companies said in the letter.

The repeal of Net Neutrality is Anti-consumer, Anti-American garbage that only seeks to benefit the already in power ISPs that can throttle and effectively destroy startup Internet businesses that are unable to pay the ransom that bigger businesses like Netflix and Amazon can pay for. If you truly care for not just Freedom of speech, but for freedom of business, then you should be for protecting the Internet from the big telecom companies.

 

[TheGoverness]

#SaveNetNeutrality

 

[MaggieD]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-of-each-others-cloud-services-idUSKBN1DS0TO

The whole basis of Ashit Pi's argument for killing your internet is built on the false premise that repealing Net Neutrality protections would allow businesses to thrive. If that were the case, why are so Businesses that have innovated and thrived over the Internet like AirBnB, Netflix, Amazon, Etsy, and Reddit oppose the repeal of Net Neutrality?



The repeal of Net Neutrality is Anti-consumer, Anti-American garbage that only seeks to benefit the already in power ISP's that can throttle and effectively destroy startup Internet businesses that are unable to pay the ransom that bigger businesses like Netflix and Amazon can pay for. If you truly care for not just Freedom of speech, but for freedom of business, then you should be for protecting the Internet from the big telecom companies.

I so wish that the White House would explain why they feel it necessary to do so. We only hear one side of the argument. Everyone telling us it’s a terrible thing. And imputing bad motives for getting rid of it. That is simply too difficult to believe in the world we live in right now.

 

[Praxas]

I so wish that the White House would explain why they feel it necessary to do so. We only hear one side of the argument. Everyone telling us it’s a terrible thing. And imputing bad motives for getting rid of it. That is simply too difficult to believe in the world we live in right now.

Because the swamp was never going to get drained and is still occupied by big corporate interests. And when I mean big I mean like the communication industries. Money talks and the American consumer interest walks.

 

[TheGoverness]

I so wish that the White House would explain why they feel it necessary to do so. We only hear one side of the argument. Everyone telling us it’s a terrible thing. And imputing bad motives for getting rid of it. That is simply too difficult to believe in the world we live in right now.

It really is a terrible thing, though. Here's why removing Net Neutrality would be such a bad thing:

https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now

There is a reason why the vast majority of people are opposed to repealing it.

 

[MaggieD]

Because the swamp was never going to get drained and is still occupied by big corporate interests. And when I mean big I mean like the communication industries. Money talks and the American consumer interest walks.

I did a little Googling and see that net neutrality was just begun in 2015. Nice innocuous name it has. The White House believes that the effect of net neutrality was to stifle expansion of internet services, most especially in rural communities.

So I ask those opposed to answer this: The Internet has grown in efficiency, speed, access and content ever since its inception. It’s been absolutely remarkable technology that has done nothing but give more people access, greater speeds than could ever have been imagined, incredible information availability, etc., etc. it has become almost an essential tool for most people.

What was broken that had to be fixed in 2015?

Please be specific.

 

[MaggieD]

It really is a terrible thing, though. Here's why removing Net Neutrality would be such a bad thing:

https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now

There is a reason why the vast majority of people are opposed to repealing it.

Net Neutrality is the basic principle that prohibits internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from speeding up, slowing down or blocking any content, applications or websites you want to use. Net Neutrality is the way that the internet has always worked

Notice the last line in the paragraph I lifted from your link.

 

[Slyfox696]

I so wish that the White House would explain why they feel it necessary to do so. We only hear one side of the argument. Everyone telling us it’s a terrible thing. And imputing bad motives for getting rid of it. That is simply too difficult to believe in the world we live in right now.

That's because, with the exception of serving the interests of big business, there is ZERO argument for removing Net Neutrality. That's why you don't hear the White House explain it, because they know there's only one reason to do it.

Removing it hurts small business, hurts start-ups and hurts consumers.

I did a little Googling and see that net neutrality was just begun in 2015. Nice innocuous name it has. The White House believes that the effect of net neutrality was to stifle expansion of internet services, most especially in rural communities.

So I ask those opposed to answer this: The Internet has grown in efficiency, speed, access and content ever since its inception. It’s been absolutely remarkable technology that has done nothing but give more people access, greater speeds than could ever have been imagined, incredible information availability, etc., etc. it has become almost an essential tool for most people.

What was broken that had to be fixed in 2015?

Please be specific.

Because the Internet has evolved, dramatically, in the last 5-10 years. Look at the influence of Amazon on Black Friday, the rise of Netflix and YouTube. Look at how many TV streaming services there are now.

The world has changed and has become ever more reliant on the Internet. Which also means Internet usage has grown substantially. The Internet is used in ways it could never be used 15 years ago.

It's not that anything was "broken", it's that the world had to adapt to the evolving influence of the Internet.

 

[joG]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-of-each-others-cloud-services-idUSKBN1DS0TO

The whole basis of Ashit Pi's argument for killing your internet is built on the false premise that repealing Net Neutrality protections would allow businesses to thrive. If that were the case, why are so Businesses that have innovated and thrived over the Internet like AirBnB, Netflix, Amazon, Etsy, and Reddit oppose the repeal of Net Neutrality?



The repeal of Net Neutrality is Anti-consumer, Anti-American garbage that only seeks to benefit the already in power ISPs that can throttle and effectively destroy startup Internet businesses that are unable to pay the ransom that bigger businesses like Netflix and Amazon can pay for. If you truly care for not just Freedom of speech, but for freedom of business, then you should be for protecting the Internet from the big telecom companies.

The problem with regulating large and complex pricing systems is that it is hard to understand the impacts of regulation change without an algorithm. I have not looked at or even seen mention of such models.

 

[WCH]

It really is a terrible thing, though. Here's why removing Net Neutrality would be such a bad thing:

https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now

There is a reason why the vast majority of people are opposed to repealing it.

Title II is the real problem. There were already many consumer protections in place before the 2015 ruling.

https://techpolicycorner.org/net-neutrality-v-title-ii-explained-3ad8d576a50a

 

[MaggieD]

That's because, with the exception of serving the interests of big business, there is ZERO argument for removing Net Neutrality. That's why you don't hear the White House explain it, because they know there's only one reason to do it.

Removing it hurts small business, hurts start-ups and hurts consumers.

My point is simple. The internet has seen absolutely REMARKABLE improvement in speeds, content, price, etc., etc. all before 2015 when this was enacted. What was broken that had to be fixed?

So I ask those opposed to answer this: The Internet has grown in efficiency, speed, access and content ever since its inception. It’s been absolutely remarkable technology that has done nothing but give more people access, greater speeds than could ever have been imagined, incredible information availability, etc., etc. it has become almost an essential tool for most people.

What was broken that had to be fixed in 2015?

Seems to me this gives GVMT control of what we see...

I’m going to start a thread on this. I’m very curious.

 

[Praxas]

I did a little Googling and see that net neutrality was just begun in 2015. Nice innocuous name it has. The White House believes that the effect of net neutrality was to stifle expansion of internet services, most especially in rural communities.

So I ask those opposed to answer this: The Internet has grown in efficiency, speed, access and content ever since its inception. It’s been absolutely remarkable technology that has done nothing but give more people access, greater speeds than could ever have been imagined, incredible information availability, etc., etc. it has become almost an essential tool for most people.

What was broken that had to be fixed in 2015?

Please be specific.

Net Neutrality didn't just show up in 2015, it was long in the making since even around 2010.

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

 

[MaggieD]

Net Neutrality didn't just show up in 2015, it was long in the making since even around 2010.

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

My question is simple. What was broken that had to be fixed by putting the gvmt in charge?

 

[TheGoverness]

I did a little Googling and see that net neutrality was just begun in 2015. Nice innocuous name it has. The White House believes that the effect of net neutrality was to stifle expansion of internet services, most especially in rural communities.

The White House is full of morons. Net Neutrality prevents ISP's from making it harder for other people to use the internet, by making them treat everyone equally, not by "stifling" them. It prevents them from screwing the little guy over. And Net Neutrality didn't just "show" up in 2015. It's been around for a long ass time.

So I ask those opposed to answer this: The Internet has grown in efficiency, speed, access and content ever since its inception. It’s been absolutely remarkable technology that has done nothing but give more people access, greater speeds than could ever have been imagined, incredible information availability, etc., etc. it has become almost an essential tool for most people.

What was broken that had to be fixed in 2015?

Please be specific.

Although there weren't any clear legal protections for Net Neutrality until 2015, this has been an ongoing debate since the 1990's according to what I've read. And numerous incidents have popped up in the past regarding ISP's violating the principle of net neutrality, one notable example is Netflix's beef with Comcast a few years ago. And people have been lobbying for internet protections for a long time.

Net Neutrality prevents ISP's from trying to break something that doesn't need fixing, and screwing everyone else over. It also prevents ISP's from blocking websites that they don't want you to see, or creating "slow" and "fast" lanes.

 

[TheGoverness]

Notice the last line in the paragraph I lifted from your link.

And your point ia? ISP's have tried to go against the principle numerous tims before the 20q5 ruling, hence the need to impliment federal protections.

 

[MaggieD]

The White House is full of morons. Net Neutrality prevents ISP's from making it harder for other people to use the internet, by making them treat everyone equally, not by "stifling" them. It prevents them from screwing the little guy over. And Net Neutrality didn't just "show" up in 2015. It's been around for a long ass time.

Although there weren't any clear legal protections for Net Neutrality until 2015, this has been an ongoing debate since the 1990's according to what I've read. And numerous incidents have popped up in the past regarding ISP's violating the principle of net neutrality, one notable example is Netflix's beef with Comcast a few years ago. And people have been lobbying for internet protections for a long time.

Net Neutrality prevents ISP's from trying to break something that doesn't need fixing, and screwing everyone else over. It also prevents ISP's from blocking websites that they don't want you to see, or creating "slow" and "fast" lanes.

It doesn’t do what you say it does though. I chose an internet speed that was less money per month than the top speed available. I’ve convinced myself, with Maggie logic, that there is some other reason that the gvmt wants to control the internet. My evidence is simply that the providers are tiering service right now. And people argue net neutrality will prevent this. It’s here. It’s not preventing it. So....?

 

[Praxas]

My question is simple. What was broken that had to be fixed by putting the gvmt in charge?

It didn't put government in charge so much as it put limitations on internet providers to prevent throttling and banning of sites from the service provider.

 

[joG]

That's because, with the exception of serving the interests of big business, there is ZERO argument for removing Net Neutrality. That's why you don't hear the White House explain it, because they know there's only one reason to do it.

Removing it hurts small business, hurts start-ups and hurts consumers.

Because the Internet has evolved, dramatically, in the last 5-10 years. Look at the influence of Amazon on Black Friday, the rise of Netflix and YouTube. Look at how many TV streaming services there are now.

The world has changed and has become ever more reliant on the Internet. Which also means Internet usage has grown substantially. The Internet is used in ways it could never be used 15 years ago.

It's not that anything was "broken", it's that the world had to adapt to the evolving influence of the Internet.

Actually, the "interests of big business" are not at all the issue here. There will be big businesses that gain advantages from this rugulation or that. It is not even well understood (at least as far as I have seen) whether big businesses (as well as consumers) that profit from one regulation in period 1 after legislation will be the ones to profit in the long run. Without a better gradp of these things, I really do not know how one would want to judge.

But even this is not necessarily the most important level of impact to look at. The internet does not only solve for economic welfare. It also solves for socio-political efficiency and possibly even with civic stability at stake.

 

[MaggieD]

It didn't put government in charge so much as it put limitations on internet providers to prevent throttling and banning of sites from the service provider.

They throttle now. So how has net neutrality prevented it if it’s happening NOW.

I’m really just asking people to think. Everyone has bought into the “We must have net neutrality.” What does that even mean? Why is it called Net Neutrality? I’m not trying to be difficult. I’m just asking that people think about it and realize the miraculous advancements in internet access, speeds, content, etc., etc., All accomplished before net neutrality came to be. Why did the gvmt want to take control? It wasn’t broken.

 

[MaggieD]

It didn't put government in charge so much as it put limitations on internet providers to prevent throttling and banning of sites from the service provider.

They throttle right now, so quite obviously net neutrality doesn’t prohibit that.

 

[Praxas]

They throttle right now, so quite obviously net neutrality doesn’t prohibit that.

They do not throttle to the point of service disruption nor are they allowed to ban sites. without Net Neutrality, they can. Is that what you want? I want a free internet that I can access any site. You seem to want the companies to make that choice for you.

 

[What if...?]

They throttle right now, so quite obviously net neutrality doesn’t prohibit that.

Pretty sure the throttling you're talking about is about bandwidth.

The "throttling" opponents are talking about is throttling based on who pays more for access itself.

Like charging more for "premium channels"

Its not Like long distance phone calling used to be, where the cost is about getting the call where it needs to go.

Its more like "lots of people are going to site "x". Lets charge those folks extra to see their content. Or charge the site extra or slow access to a crawl.

Like "when we have them by the balls, they'll pay whatever we want."

 

[Slyfox696]

My point is simple. The internet has seen absolutely REMARKABLE improvement in speeds, content, price, etc., etc. all before 2015 when this was enacted. What was broken that had to be fixed?



Seems to me this gives GVMT control of what we see...

I’m going to start a thread on this. I’m very curious.

I already answered that in my post. I edited it in after my original. I'll re-post it.

Because the Internet has evolved, dramatically, in the last 5-10 years. Look at the influence of Amazon on Black Friday, the rise of Netflix and YouTube. Look at how many TV streaming services there are now.

The world has changed and has become ever more reliant on the Internet. Which also means Internet usage has grown substantially. The Internet is used in ways it could never be used 15 years ago.

It's not that anything was "broken", it's that the world had to adapt to the evolving influence of the Internet.

It doesn’t do what you say it does though. I chose an internet speed that was less money per month than the top speed available. I’ve convinced myself, with Maggie logic, that there is some other reason that the gvmt wants to control the internet. My evidence is simply that the providers are tiering service right now. And people argue net neutrality will prevent this. It’s here. It’s not preventing it. So....?

Net Neutrality isn't the government controlling the Internet. If you're reading any source which says it does, then you need to immediately stop reading that source.

They throttle right now, so quite obviously net neutrality doesn’t prohibit that.

Not legally, they don't.

Don't confuse broadband ISPs with wireless ISPs (cell phone data). The rules adopted by the FCC did not cover mobile providers and, as such, the repeal won't change anything with them.

 

[MaggieD]

They do not throttle to the point of service disruption nor are they allowed to ban sites. without Net Neutrality, they can. Is that what you want? I want a free internet that I can access any site. You seem to want the companies to make that choice for you.

What sites can you see now that you couldn’t see in 2014? They’ve NEVER throttled to the point of service disruption. That’s the business they’re in.

 

[Beaudreaux]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-of-each-others-cloud-services-idUSKBN1DS0TO

The whole basis of Ashit Pi's argument for killing your internet is built on the false premise that repealing Net Neutrality protections would allow businesses to thrive. If that were the case, why are so Businesses that have innovated and thrived over the Internet like AirBnB, Netflix, Amazon, Etsy, and Reddit oppose the repeal of Net Neutrality?



The repeal of Net Neutrality is Anti-consumer, Anti-American garbage that only seeks to benefit the already in power ISPs that can throttle and effectively destroy startup Internet businesses that are unable to pay the ransom that bigger businesses like Netflix and Amazon can pay for. If you truly care for not just Freedom of speech, but for freedom of business, then you should be for protecting the Internet from the big telecom companies.

The ISP's have the power, because they have the money, and control the doors to the internet for everyone else. Net Neutrality is the ONLY option to ensure a truly free environment that encourages commerce, financial growth, and provides a platform for the free exchange of ideas and gives the same power to the voice of all the people that the government and those with money already enjoy.