AT&T didn’t waste any time abandoning net neutrality

[Antiganon]

Data caps are still normal for the cellular network, but not for your cable/fibre at home. The caps will probably disappear in the near future in place with actual competition. This is a huge step backwards, and Mr. Pie should have is huge mouth filled with used condoms and bloody tampons, and his lips sown shut.

Oh this is for home internet? I thought this was for mobile - i.e. you can stream AT&T content on your phone without it counting towards your mobile data cap.

Home data caps are a travesty.

EDIT: read article again, it is wireless plans. This is literally the same thing they have been doing for months.

[meowfurion]

And here we are seeing the full effects of lobbying and negative campaigning by AT&T and friends

Completely brainwashed to go against your own interests.

Precisely. It's sad. We could have the speed and internet quality of European countries at this point if Comcast and AT&T were not given a free pass to do what they've done.

- - - Updated - - -

Considering how balless your government has been even in front of the pharma industry, allow me to laugh. The thing is the help your government given to ISP is pretty much required for its very existence. Similar to the airline industries. The problem is where other countries attempt to set up rules so that after the help they provide companies are free to compete fairly.

BY all means, do laugh. It's my biggest complaint right now. It's just absolutely unforgivable. The market would have decided long ago that Comcast didn't deserve their money due to how awful they are as a company and a service, but since they were allowed by our own Congress to become what they did, we are stuck with this right now. I hope it changes.

[Santti]

Precisely. It's sad. We could have the speed and internet quality of European countries at this point if Comcast and AT&T were not given a free pass to do what they've done.

Quick, tell me what is Net Neutrality and how removing will alleviate the situation?

[Jtbrig7390]

Yes. Part of my point was to get people to come to the conclusion that this monopoly is totally the fault of government intervention

And you would be factually wrong and the government has stepped in many times to stop it. One example being when AT&T wanted to buy out comcast.

You clearly don't have a clue what you are talking about. The government also stepped in and told AT&T to go fuck themselves when they tried to stop google from using there lines. You know google being new competition and all.

You have clearly shown you don't know what NN is and how all of this works.

[meowfurion]

False equivalence.

"Government approved ISP monopolies are bad, therefore all government intervention is bad". Does not track.

What about government intervention in construction i.e. building codes?
What about government intervention in pharmaceuticals i.e. "it is illegal to sell literal poison and claim it cures cancer"?
What about government intervention in education i.e. "it is illegal to call yourself a university if you don't actually teach anything and just offer paid seminars on how to sell real estate"?
What about government intervention in firearm sales i.e. "it is illegal to buy a bazooka for home defense"?
What about government intervention in corporate pollution i.e. "it is illegal to dump your toxic waste into this reservoir for drinking water"?

You're issuing a straw man argument. I won't entertain your statist mentality.

What about the DMV and their "efficiency and speed of service?"

What about the IRS and their "efficiency and speed of service?"

What about the military branches and their "cost effective and responsible spending policies?"

What about Congress and their "cost effective and responsible spending policies?"

Please stop suckling at the government teet and circling the wagons for their defense. Take up for your small underdogs more, not the giant lobbyist controlled government mass control machine you are currently defending.

[Daedius]

America has been trying to rid net neutral a load of times under various guises, just that this one was rather blatant about it.

Attempts will continue under different guises.

[Drutt]

Wait, the companies who were anti-Net Neutrality were actually lying and DID intend to act in a non-neutral fashion?

Well, colour me surprised. I sure didn't see that happening!

[Triggered Fridgekin]

People were all pissed off about net neutrality, and there were some protests after it happened, but they’re basically taking it up the ass now because they’ve moved on to the next thing that pisses them off. They don’t stick with something and protest until change happens like a lot of other countries do.

The say of the people is essentially over. Half of the Senate wants to reverse the FCC ruling but that's as far as it'll realistically go since it would have to push through the House and then Trump in order to be overturned. The next time the people will have a say on this will be the mid-term election so expect torches and pitchforks in 2020.

[tankbug]

Oh this is for home internet? I thought this was for mobile - i.e. you can stream AT&T content on your phone without it counting towards your mobile data cap.

Home data caps are a travesty.

EDIT: read article again, it is wireless plans. This is literally the same thing they have been doing for months.

Yes, I was talking about the repeal of net neutrality itself, I guess I have should have clarified that.

[meowfurion]

Quick, tell me what is Net Neutrality and how removing will alleviate the situation?

No. You seem to want to just argue with me and we wholeheartedly agree at the end of the day.

Monoplies are bad, Net Neutrality did nothing to stop it from happening, but removing Net Neutrality also removed the power of the government to control even more of the internet that it's already had a hand in 'fucking up."

- - - Updated - - -

And you would be factually wrong and the government has stepped in many times to stop it. One example being when AT&T wanted to buy out comcast.

You clearly don't have a clue what you are talking about. The government also stepped in and told AT&T to go fuck themselves when they tried to stop google from using there lines. You know google being new competition and all.

You have clearly shown you don't know what NN is and how all of this works.

It's because of government intervention that we even have this situation in the first place...

http://www.tbo.com/list/news-opinion...lies-20140305/

Try reading more and insulting less.

[cparle87]

Then don't give them your money. It's called "free market". And it's powerful.

And ever notice Canadians always make sure to tell you they're Canadian?

Just like Vegeterians and Crossfitters and Italians. They ALWAYS make sure to bring it up in conversation. LOL

Except all the internet companies have agreements not to compete with one another, so in big sections of the country there's only one choice.

[Zeta333]

http://bgr.com/2018/02/23/att-net-ne...ess-plans-ugh/

I mean if we want to get technical they are still standing by that statement. As they arnt shitting on anythings speed, just removing data cap for companies that pay extra. They didnt cover that in thier statement.

[Zekthul]

Data caps are still normal for the cellular network, but not for your cable/fibre at home. The caps will probably disappear in the near future in place with actual competition. This is a huge step backwards, and Mr. Pie should have is huge mouth filled with used condoms and bloody tampons, and his lips sown shut.

As pointed out this is for AT&T mobile, industry practice is data caps. However some of the small home services also have data caps, although usually its just they slow down speed after hitting them. This is more common in rural areas with satellite/wireless internet where infrastructure hasn't been established to support cable. Hughes net for example does this and I'm sure others do as well.

[Jtbrig7390]

It's because of government intervention that we even have this situation in the first place...

http://www.tbo.com/list/news-opinion...lies-20140305/

Try reading more and insulting less.

A puff piece isn't fact buddy.

You can spend 2 seconds on google to see what I said is true or believe a puff pieces. So whatever floats your boat.

[LMuhlen]

BY all means, do laugh. It's my biggest complaint right now. It's just absolutely unforgivable. The market would have decided long ago that Comcast didn't deserve their money due to how awful they are as a company and a service, but since they were allowed by our own Congress to become what they did, we are stuck with this right now. I hope it changes.

While I understand where you are coming from, it is important to keep in mind how services like internet and electricity are unique in the sense that they are extremely expensive to install and barely profitable in low density areas. Free market would tend to leave full areas without coverage and governmental interference is a solution to make sure these important services are offered to everyone. It does come with a price, which is the effective monopoly in some places. But the alternative could potentially be not having the service at all.

Maybe the govern interference could have taken another shape, could have been better designed to give incentive to the companies owning the infrastructure to share it and avoid monopolies. But when money talks, principles get blurred.

Regarding giving exclusive benefits to some internet services, it may look harmless, but it can be dangerous if it shapes the evolution of the plans to a direction where they have even stricter data limits and effectively only the sponsored services are viable at all.

[Antiganon]

You're issuing a straw man argument. I won't entertain your statist mentality.

What about the DMV and their "efficiency and speed of service?"

What about the IRS and their "efficiency and speed of service?"

What about the military branches and their "cost effective and responsible spending policies?"

What about Congress and their "cost effective and responsible spending policies?"

Please stop suckling at the government teet and circling the wagons for their defense. Take up for your small underdogs more, not the giant lobbyist controlled government mass control machine you are currently defending.

You are talking about government organizations being inefficient as a reason the government should just let corporations do whatever they want.

Because government regulated industry is totally the same as government administered public service.

Who is making a strawman here?

[Santti]

No. You seem to want to just argue with me and we wholeheartedly agree at the end of the day.

Monoplies are bad, Net Neutrality did nothing to stop it from happening, but removing Net Neutrality also removed the power of the government to control even more of the internet that it's already had a hand in 'fucking up."

Net Neutrality is not part of the equation why those monopolies happen and why they exist.

[meowfurion]

A puff piece isn't fact buddy.

You can spend 2 seconds on google to see what I said is true or believe puff pieces. So whatever floats your boat.

The issue is that you are ASSUMING that Net Neutrality was the faithful magical happy totally ethical government (who's totally responsible for the Comcast/AT&T/Time Warner situation we have right now in the first place) having the average internet user's best interests at heart.

Or would you rather be like China, where specific web sites are blocked per the "Ministry of Culture" from being seen by the public, legally so, due to their own "net neutrality' rules?

[Deleted]

What i find more of a surprise is that in 2018, in a 1st world country, they still have data caps and use certain content not counting towards them as a comparative advantage.

[Linkedblade]

[url]http://bgr.com/2018/02/23/att-net-neutrality-wireless-plans-ugh/[url]



Bonus round: Whopper Neutrality.
[video=youtube;ltzy5vRmN8Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltzy5vRmN8Q[video]

Except it doesn't. It's just a monetary move. They aren't granting increased speeds to their sponsors. Or slowing speeds of services that aren't their sponsors. Or affecting the individuals' connection speeds to either services.

Also, net neutrality hasn't changed. The issue that was causing the conversation last year was the FCC was going to change who enforces it to the FTC. Net neutrality had nothing to do with anything.