Net neutrality gone

[Machismo]

Nope that´s exactly what a employer is for paying their employees so much money that they can afford a home, food and then all the nice little things that make life bearable aka giving them the money so that they can buy things so that the industry will grow.

I have no problem paying wages. I have a huge problem when the government forces them to also cover their health care. If people don't want others involved in their medical decisions (something I strongly agree with), then they shouldn't be forcing others to pay for them.

[Orlong]

See you in early 2015. At this points it's on Congress... you know the people WE elected to make decisions for us. Not the FCC when it comes to things they clearly don't understand.

Also, the marketing going into both sides is insane. We won't be getting Cable TV like packages for Internet because of this. If that ever happens, it was going to happen regardless. Never underestimate the greed of these corporations whose only concern is making money and turning a profit.

Yeah, they must have all forgotten paying their monthly add ons for every website they wanted to access prior to the net neutrality law enacted a couple years ago

[Aquinan]

You done fucked up yanks, good work, yet again.

[Rudkobing]

[Please upgrade your package to view this comment]

*sigh*

[affanv]

Internet freedom is right of every individual and if you pay for your service you deserve the full potential of your internet, not just a throttled connection which makes your internet browsing a pain, this is something very serious and each individual should raise there voice against FCC to make internet neutral. Also, you can fight back by using a VPN service and make your activities anonymous from ISPs and Government.

bestvpnprovider.com/net-neutrality-vpn/

[Blysto]

Net neutrality should be a standart thing. It's just bullshit that a provider has the ability to charge more for certain services on the internet. Happy to live in The Netherlands for this one time...

[xenogear3]

And why shouldn’t a heavy user pay more than someone who just checks the news and their email?

Because heavy users don't have a job. Stay at home and only watch Netflix and Youtube.
Their lives matter too.

Light users are more likely rich, and has other entertainment.

[Gorsameth]

The person responsible for the repeal was appointed by Obama. Not Trump. Our statement for NN hold more value when we actually use facts.

I also think people should fact check on how many countries actually have NN laws. Not many do, and if you're not in the USA there is a high chance you already live/lived in a country that didn't have them.

The FCC board has 5 members, each serves for 5 years, one new person every year.
Only 3 members are allowed to be from the same political party.
So if there are already 3 Democrats (and there were before this year) and a Republican's term is over Obama would have had to pick a Republican.
This year one of the Democrats's term was up and so Trump was able to assign a Republican in his stead. Moving the balance from 3D 2R to 3R 2D.

[tankbug]

Seems like the internet was just as free and open before the Obama administration made the net neutrality law as it was after. The only net neutrality law I would support is a single line law stating that all internet traffic must be treated the same. The current net neutrality law is so full of government control, overregulation, and unnecessary bullshit, it deserves to go down in flames. In fact 90% of it has nothing to do with net neutrality, much like most laws

And what specifically about NN do you think is oppressive and should be removed? Is it better to have nothing then?

[hulkgor]

This will effect anything on American servers, however, including Blizzard products.

You do realize EU players play on, *gasp*, european servers, right?

[rda]

And what specifically about NN do you think is oppressive and should be removed? Is it better to have nothing then?

NN takes away freedom from the carriers which just prevents various good things from happening.

You know, it's really amusing to read these fear stories of separate options for gaming and social sites in this threads, which are typical one-sided BS. There is a vast other side.

Here is an excerpt from the description of T-Mobile Binge On feature:

"Now you can stream all you want for FREE without using your data. -- With Binge On, Simple Choice users on a qualifying plan are FREE to stream unlimited video on your favorite services like YouTube, Netflix, HBO NOW, and many more without using a drop of your high-speed data. Nothing to configure – all automatically applied to your qualifying plan. Streamers, go ahead and Binge On."

Added: in return you are limited to viewing only at 480p.

https://www.t-mobile.com/offer/binge...ing-video.html

Note how the feature *gives* things to the user instead of taking them away. If you like the trade-off, you take it. If you don't like it, you don't take it. Turns out, many like it. And why shouldn't they, right? Everyone has different needs. It's what the market does - creates different options which people then buy or not buy, etc.

But that trade-off is impossible according to NN - there were claims that this feature is super-bad because it violates NN.

So here's your other side.

This whole hullabaloo about NN on reddit and on the web in general is a big bubble of one-sided BS that has very little to do with reality. You are being scare-mongered into wanting NN, while it is exactly in your interests - as a customer - to want the situation in which *all* participants of the market and not just content providers have freedom to innovate. That freedom produces competition, drives progress forward and drives prices down.

[Orlong]

It's actually happened. ISPs noticed a huge amount of bandwidth was going through Netflix. So they throttled them. In layman's terms that means that if you or I wanted to watch Netflix, the episodes would take longer to load deliberately. The ISPs then went to Netflix and said 'pay us more to stop throttling you.' Obama didn't like it and passed net neutrality. Now Trump and his big business buddies are throwing it out. "Hey, we notice you play WoW. Throttled, unless you buy our super deluxe MMO package, only $5 a month on top of your existing bill!" Another 5 for youtube, another 5 for amazon, another 5 for facebook. Etc etc. There's nothing stopping them.

Why should Comcast have to spend billions upgrading their infrastructure to support the high number of Netflix customers using so much data that other Comcast customers are getting a subpar experience due to slow connections when the Netflix data hogs are feeding at the trough all night. Netflix shouldnt have the ability to negatively impact customers of another business (Comcast).

Its no different than opening a water park right next to a housing development and not doing anything to upgrade the current water supply system, and expecting none of the residents to get mad when their faucets drip so slowly that they cant even wash the soap off their hands. Guess it wouldn't be the water park's fault that there isnt any water for the residents right next door. If Netflix wants to exist in their current form, then they SHOULD have to either pay Comcast a per customer fee so that Comcast can upgrade their equipment, or they can upgrade the equipment for Comcast

[Draco-Onis]

Why should Comcast have to spend billions upgrading their infrastructure to support the high number of Netflix customers using so much data that other Comcast customers are getting a subpar experience due to slow connections when the Netflix data hogs are feeding at the trough all night. Netflix shouldnt have the ability to negatively impact customers of another business (Comcast).
t

1) That's not how the internet works you are confusing the internet for your home network where it slows down when you have too many people on Wifi. Please educate yourself this is downright embrassing.

2) Comcast has data caps in certain states along with tiered pricing.

3) Comcast is the most hated company in America along with their peers and this has been going on for years. The reason they are still in business is because they are protected by government regulations that kill competition and allow them to have their monopoly. Comcast subpar experience is because Comcast doesn't give a flying fuck about their customers and know they have no choice.

[Beazy]

Why should Comcast have to spend billions upgrading their infrastructure to support the high number of Netflix customers using so much data that other Comcast customers are getting a subpar experience due to slow connections when the Netflix data hogs are feeding at the trough all night. Netflix shouldnt have the ability to negatively impact customers of another business (Comcast).

Its no different than opening a water park right next to a housing development and not doing anything to upgrade the current water supply system, and expecting none of the residents to get mad when their faucets drip so slowly that they cant even wash the soap off their hands. Guess it wouldn't be the water park's fault that there isnt any water for the residents right next door. If Netflix wants to exist in their current form, then they SHOULD have to either pay Comcast a per customer fee so that Comcast can upgrade their equipment, or they can upgrade the equipment for Comcast

Comcast should not have sold me a service @ 3.5 megs a second then. My service agreement does not state 3.5 megs *except for popular website we want to monetize*. Pulling down 3.5 megs from Netflix is identical to pulling 3.5 megs from Tobylikestacosandburritos.com. Acting like a server at the Netflix headquarters is costing more to send data than a server in the building next door is absolute insanity. You have to know absolutely NOTHING about how the internet works to even buy into that crazy bullshit.

I also had to laugh out loud when you stated that Netflix doesnt pay for bandwidth. I dont even know how to respond to that. /facepalm

[Sathnick]

NN takes away freedom from the carriers which just prevents various good things from happening.

You know, it's really amusing to read these fear stories of separate options for gaming and social sites in this threads, which are typical one-sided BS. There is a vast other side.

Here is an excerpt from the description of T-Mobile Binge On feature:

"Now you can stream all you want for FREE without using your data. -- With Binge On, Simple Choice users on a qualifying plan are FREE to stream unlimited video on your favorite services like YouTube, Netflix, HBO NOW, and many more without using a drop of your high-speed data. Nothing to configure – all automatically applied to your qualifying plan. Streamers, go ahead and Binge On."

https://www.t-mobile.com/offer/binge...ing-video.html

Note how the feature *gives* things to the user instead of taking them away.

And that's by the way, is impossible with NN - there were claims that this feature is super-bad because it violates NN.

This whole hullabaloo about NN on reddit and on the web in general is a big bubble of one-sided BS that has very little to do with reality. You are being scare-mongered into wanting NN, while it is exactly in your interests - as a customer - to want the situation in which *all* participants of the market and not just content providers have freedom to innovate. That freedom produces competition, drives progress forward and drives prices down.

You dont seem to understand the Topic at all. In your own Quote you already mention the most important Thing - "users on a qualifying plan". Of Course the ISP's can offer great Things (just like they could with NN) but they will do so for a premium.
At the end of the day the average consumer will lose. The People w/ sufficient Money to not care at all wont really notice but the great majority will. If you do expect great Things out of this for the average user then please educate yourself.

Doesnt really matter at the end though - this Thing will now be dragged through legal battles and state laws and hopefully wont ever come into effect.

[rda]

You dont seem to understand the Topic at all. In your own Quote you already mention the most important Thing - "users on a qualifying plan". Of Course the ISP's can offer great Things (just like they could with NN) but they will do so for a premium.
At the end of the day the average consumer will lose. The People w/ sufficient Money to not care at all wont really notice but the great majority will. If you do expect great Things out of this for the average user then please educate yourself.

Doesnt really matter at the end though - this Thing will now be dragged through legal battles and state laws and hopefully wont ever come into effect.

What??? Dear, it is you who seems not to understand the topic. Did you even read what I wrote? It looks like you read just enough to get that I am against NN and went to write a generic response which does not really discuss what I said. Re-read the post you quoted, I expanded with a couple of explanations since you replied, we cross-posted.

No, at the end of the day the customer will win. That's how the market works. It creates win-win situations. If you don't want the feature, you don't buy it. You buy the thing that you want.

[Hammerfest]

I think Morpheus has a point...

[rda]

3) Comcast is the most hated company in America along with their peers and this has been going on for years. The reason they are still in business is because they are protected by government regulations that kill competition and allow them to have their monopoly. Comcast subpar experience is because Comcast doesn't give a flying fuck about their customers and know they have no choice.

Brigade against those regulations, not for NN.

By campaigning for NN you make the competition much less likely to appear, not more. For real.

[ro9ue]

Honestly I think losing net neutrality would fine if we didn't have the situation in middle America where there is NO FREE MARKET FOR ISPs AT ALL. Generally when you move into a new place here they just tell you outright "We have Comcast (or whatever) here." Because there are no options. It's a monopoly plain and simple.

If I could just go to ISP A after ISP B acted like a dick, there would be no problem. And the fact that ISP B wouldn't act like a dick they would knowingly lose customers to ISP A would keep everything in balance.

[Beazy]

I think Morpheus has a point...

Not it wasn't. /facepalm

The big providers were piloting data packages, subscription access packages and variable billing in 30+ states. NN stopped that garbage in its tracks.