War over net neutrality in the US has begun. Ajit Pai named FCC Chairman by Trump

[Alcsaar]

Well, if companies can charge different rates, they can make more money and hence innovate and lay down even better cables, so you'll get even faster internet.

Or just roger people over the barrel for more money

In a perfect world maybe thats logical. Those extra profits get pocketed in this world.

[Masark]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...IjFLb4Ri6mdJuA

Its 23 pages long and it discusses each argument in favour of net neutrality. Its technical so be prepared. TL;DR: Most of the concerns of net neutrality proponents are better addresed by anti-trust laws and net neutrality is a form of price control that stiffles innovation and harms consumer welfare.

There's no technical in there. Their assertion that wireless service will meaningfully compete with hardwired service shows that they are not be taken seriously.

- - - Updated - - -

We need either more competition or municipal broadband that is city owned to give people the choices they need

You will get neither of those under this guy. He's been a major supporter of allowing states to ban municipal broadband.

[Crissi]

There's no technical in there. Their assertion that wireless service will meaningfully compete with hardwired service shows that they are not be taken seriously.

Theres been wireless "microwave" service in my area for a few years now. My folks just switched since its exponentially better than the satelite we were using. However, its done nothing to drive down prices or increase benefits from cable companies. It only really competes with satellite companies.

[dwarven]

Here's a great video on it by Eben Moglen mixed in with a talk on the broader topic of intellectual freedom:

[Masark]

Theres been wireless "microwave" service in my area for a few years now. My folks just switched since its exponentially better than the satelite we were using. However, its done nothing to drive down prices or increase benefits from cable companies. It only really competes with satellite companies.

Yeah, I know. I use such a service myself.

Anyone who claims it competes meaningfully against cable, fibre, or even DSL needs to have either their head or their bank account examined.

[Fugus]

You will get neither of those under this guy. He's been a major supporter of allowing states to ban municipal broadband.

I know, I have been looking into them, overall he looks like he is another sellout secretary by Trump who wants to dismantle and destroy anything that might actually do public good to benefit the rich.

[Crissi]

Is satellite internet basically a great way to make people want to kill themselves with shitty and unreliable service?

It is. 20 GB cap per month is "kill me now plz" territory

[alexkeren]

There's no technical in there. Their assertion that wireless service will meaningfully compete with hardwired service shows that they are not be taken seriously.

- - - Updated - - -



You will get neither of those under this guy. He's been a major supporter of allowing states to ban municipal broadband.

Please quote where the article asserts that wireless will meaningfully compete with wired?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh my god, I used 5gb on my phone last month and I barely use my phone.

You're either leaving data slurping apps running in the background, ad based apps running in the background, both, or what you do use your phone for is such high quality it uses a lot of data you can minimize by altering the quality level down.

[Dug]

It is. 20 GB cap per month is "kill me now plz" territory

Jesus how can you do anything on that? I could go through that in 2 days of my regular internet use. Hell, one day even if it's the weekend.

OT: Also lol @ the Trumpets that voted just to "drink liberul tears kek". This effects you just as much. Hope you enjoyed shooting yourself in the foot.

[Crissi]

Jesus how can you do anything on that? I could go through that in 2 days of my regular internet use. Hell, one day even if it's the weekend.

You cant really. that's essentially 1 game download, or 1 use of virtual server software for my thesis. Then you add in the fact my dad telecommutes and does a lot of online meetings, and one realizes that for a family of 4, 2 of which are data heavy users, its completely inadequate.

oh, and 20$ per additional 500 Mb after hitting cap.

[Dug]

You cant really. that's essentially 1 game download, or 1 use of virtual server software for my thesis. Then you add in the fact my dad telecommutes and does a lot of online meetings, and one realizes that for a family of 4, 2 of which are data heavy users, its completely inadequate.

oh, and 20$ per additional 500 Mb after hitting cap.

Man, that is brutal. Really makes my gripes about time warner small time

[Crissi]

Man, that is brutal. Really makes my gripes about time warner small time

yeah, so when we found out about the microwaves we switched asap. So wireless microwave stuff will def outdo satellite, but wont do shit against wired.

[starlord]

i get better internets living on an island in alaska than i did in a major city down south.

[Eliseus]

It is. 20 GB cap per month is "kill me now plz" territory

Woah, I go roughly through 700-900 a month in a family of 4. My feels for ya.

[NED funded]

Yeah, I know. I use such a service myself.

Anyone who claims it competes meaningfully against cable, fibre, or even DSL needs to have either their head or their bank account examined.

Ok Ive re-read the thing and it doesnt state that. So if you could direct me to a quote it would be great.

[Masark]

Please quote where the article asserts that wireless will meaningfully compete with wired?

Ok Ive re-read the thing and it doesnt state that. So if you could direct me to a quote it would be great.

On page 9.

The Colombia Institute for Tele-Information (CITI) Report also concludes that 4G deployments will compete directly with wireline and other existing broadband providers.

Furthermore, this heap of nonsense is from 2010. A cursory examination of their predictions and current reality shows they're completely out to lunch. Their gushing about competition that will prevent major ISPs from pulling shit has utterly failed to materialize. Wireless networks have clamped down further on data caps, and are squeezing any remaining unlimited plans out of existence, further cementing the fact that they will not compete against wired.

[NED funded]

On page 9.



Furthermore, this heap of nonsense is from 2010. A cursory examination of their predictions and current reality shows they're completely out to lunch. Their gushing about competition that will prevent major ISPs from pulling shit has utterly failed to materialize. Wireless networks have clamped down further on data caps, and are squeezing any remaining unlimited plans out of existence, further cementing the fact that they will not compete against wired.

TY for the clarification. I'll research on the topic more.

[Brubear]

What's sad is I know plenty of people who think the net neutrality rules were terrible and are happy about this, which is just mind boggling to me.

I recently did some industry certification course through my school. My classes had pretty much the same people in all of them. It was a pretty diverse group ranging from people who are fresh out of high school (I live in a conservative county in California. Agg community) who were born and raised here, people who had moved here from various states (including me), and folks who were in their 40s and 50s. Almost a quarter of the class was made up of veterans. We had liberals and conservatives of all types in it.

We were in a near unanimous agreement that these net neutrality rules were much needed (there was only ever one guy that tried to argue against them). I can't stress how pretty much every person I know who has some sort of tech background, no matter their political leanings (from socialists to moderates to conservatives to libertarians) were all in support of net neutrality because they all understand how not having them only helps the big telecom companies and no one else. Every person I personally know who opposes them? Zero tech experience and at least half of them have no form of education past high school.

That's not to say they all thought it was the best way to handle it, just that in the current political and regulatory climate, it's the best way to go about it (because the telecoms are spending BIG money to oppose any and all attempts to force them to actually compete, and most of that money is going to conservative lawmakers). It's why the fact that it's opposed by people not part of the telecom industry blows me away. The GOP has turned what isn't a partisan issue to the tech industry into a partisan issue.

[Clone]

Well, if companies can charge different rates, they can make more money and hence innovate and lay down even better cables, so you'll get even faster internet.

Or just roger people over the barrel for more money

It doesn't work like that. Companies make more money so CEOs get better bonuses. They won't innovate unless profit is seriously threatened.

[alexkeren]

On page 9.



Furthermore, this heap of nonsense is from 2010. A cursory examination of their predictions and current reality shows they're completely out to lunch. Their gushing about competition that will prevent major ISPs from pulling shit has utterly failed to materialize. Wireless networks have clamped down further on data caps, and are squeezing any remaining unlimited plans out of existence, further cementing the fact that they will not compete against wired.

Few facts you're (un)intentionally forgetting.

1). Back then 4G was equivalent of the then common wired speeds.
2). More and more wired providers are capping in one way or another.
3). And most importantly most people use wireless for Internet, and have since before 2010.