Net Neutrality Killed

[Oh Shoot]

Great. I'm sure this won't affect any of us at all, probably actually offer more outlets and speed things up at an even cheaper price for us all, right?

- OS

[Omega]

1 minute ago, Oh Shoot said:

Great. I'm sure this won't affect any of us at all, probably actually offer more outlets and speed things up at an even cheaper price for us all, right?

- OS

If Obama and Co wanted this, then it must be a poop sandwich for us.

[Oh Shoot]

Just now, Omega said:

If Obama and Co wanted this, then it must be a poop sandwich for us.

Appreciate the in-depth analysis.

- OS

[No_0ne]

I'm certainly no expert in this.  I have read a number of articles espousing both sides of the issue over the last 2 or 3 years, and I have yet to decide which is the most convincing.  Like many things, there seems to be both good and bad consequences from both actions, I will be following the arguments closely in the coming months ...

In any case, from past history, the internet seems to be a most resilient beast ...

Edited December 15, 2017 by No_0ne

[n0rlf]

I saw no good changes anywhere since it was brought to life. My costs went up and my data was throttled. 

Let's see how it turns out. Thus is unlike a lot of other changes, we should be able tell fairly quickly and push to reverse it later if needed without too much pain. 

Both sides are spinning it of course. One as great and the other OMG we are all going to die. Not sure myself how this one comes out. 

[Omega]

I never had a problem before this, and I doubt killing it will change anything.  So like I said above, if Obama and Co was for this, then there must be some hidden poop sandwich being fed to us.  I wonder if they will reverse the ICANN decision as well

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37527719

Obama tried his best to give up as much US control over to the U.N. as he could, we need to get as much back as we can. 

 

[mikegideon]

14 minutes ago, Oh Shoot said:

Appreciate the in-depth analysis.

- OS

In the beginning, there was the Internet. Then, Obama and his geniuses decided to fix one more problem that didn't exist, and added lots of regulations that accomplished absolutely nothing. Kinda like everything else he touched.

[Oh Shoot]

Hmmm, seems millions of submitted comments that the committee was supposed to consider in making a decision which were in favor of nuking neutrality were fake, or bot generated, or something, from stolen identities.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/14/fake-net-neutrality-comments-stolen-identities/

http://www.kcra.com/article/californians-names-used-in-fake-comments-supporting-net-neutrality-repeal/14438556

https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-releases-new-details-investigation-fake-net-neutrality-comments

- OS

 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2017 by Oh Shoot

[Oh Shoot]

5 hours ago, Omega said:

So like I said above, if Obama and Co was for this, then there must be some hidden poop sandwich being fed to us.

I'm more of the mind that since the big providers like Comcast / Verizon / ATT / Charter all like this, it can't be good for me.

- OS

[Ronald_55]

1 hour ago, Oh Shoot said:

I'm more of the mind that since the big providers like Comcast / Verizon / ATT / Charter all like this, it can't be good for me.

- OS

I agree. And those that say it is bad just because it happened under Obama are falling into the trap that the current administration is exploiting to get their agenda pushed through. 

[RED333]

When .gov gets involved in things it gets screwed up. Health care was not perfect but did have some competition and now look at it. Obama does not like America one bit, wants to kill capitalism every where. This net neutrality thing was a way to kill competition between providers and prices go up. I see prices going down in the next few months and years. Competition is a good  thing.

[n0rlf]

It is one thing to scream to get rid of something because Obama did it and another to just want less government. 

I see a trend still here where the left leaning folks best on Trump for everything and the right leaning folks do the same towards Obama. 

Until folks can get beyond that there is no hope of meaningful change. Just spinning the wheels. Have you learned nothing from the last few decades. Stop drinking the Kool aid. 

I am for less government, a lot less. That is not in line with what the left wants. So I disagree with them. I like a few things Obama's team did. However I still think there is some underlying agenda on the part of the Democrat party. 

The other side needs to get out of people loves also, they are not any better. Stay out of people's bedrooms and trying to legislate morality.  

As for the net thing. I am off the mind it was not needed before and will show that as we get further down the line. Most of the folks I know including me have no real choices on providers other than two maybe three. All of them suck on price and service. 

Not to mention less internet would be a good thing for our society. 

[Erik88]

3 hours ago, Oh Shoot said:

I'm more of the mind that since the big providers like Comcast / Verizon / ATT / Charter all like this, it can't be good for me.

- OS

Well said. I have a friend that worked in "customer service" for Comcrash. You would not believe the lengths they go through to screw their customers. Ever had to call theme for help? Good luck.

We're at the point that the Internet has become a necessity for most households. Nothing good will come of this.

 

 

[E4 No More]

33 minutes ago, n0rlf said:

It is one thing to scream to get rid of something because Obama did it and another to just want less government. 

I see a trend still here where the left leaning folks best on Trump for everything and the right leaning folks do the same towards Obama. 

Until folks can get beyond that there is no hope of meaningful change. Just spinning the wheels. Have you learned nothing from the last few decades. Stop drinking the Kool aid. 

I am for less government, a lot less. That is not in line with what the left wants. So I disagree with them. I like a few things Obama's team did. However I still think there is some underlying agenda on the part of the Democrat party. 

The other side needs to get out of people loves also, they are not any better. Stay out of people's bedrooms and trying to legislate morality.  

As for the net thing. I am off the mind it was not needed before and will show that as we get further down the line. Most of the folks I know including me have no real choices on providers other than two maybe three. All of them suck on price and service. 

Not to mention less internet would be a good thing for our society. 

You mean amoral things like stealing, rape, and murder?

[Erik88]

43 minutes ago, n0rlf said:

 

Not to mention less internet would be a good thing for our society. 

As you post on an online forum....

[n0rlf]

Nope those have laws in place. Not only are they illegal but also immoral to almost everyone. 

Beyond that we need to back off and let people live their lives. If it is not harming themselves or others and not infringing on someone's rights leave it alone. 

Here is the problem, I am for leaving government out of lives. That means abortion (a very hot topic) as well. It is not up to you or I or our government what a woman does with her body. It is between her, the father, and whatever deity they choose to worship. Not s popular vote amongst Republicans though. 

I personally do not like the idea but it is not my choice to make. 

I also think we need to to away with most welfare. Not exactly friendly view to Democrats. 

Less government, we should not have anyone telling us how to live. Now we have to have some rules and laws of course but the Fed needs to be pruned back. The states in some cases do also. 

Don't think just because you have a view on something it is how it should be. 

That is why we are where we are. Folks vote down the list for d or r because it is the "Party Line". 

In other words, sheep need to shed and grow teeth. 

Net rules are not needed yet. We need more choice not just 3 or 4 big companies. Let them stand on their own without regulating it. I think the better way to do it is let it be and competition will help get it right. If anyone had a choice would they stay with att, or Comcast? Nope, they are terrible. That is what we have it does not work get rid of it and try something else if that does not work then try plan c. 

 

Edited December 15, 2017 by n0rlf
Spelling again

[n0rlf]

5 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

As you post on an online forum....

Yes I do, but I have not been in an accident or injured myself while doing it. 

I use it while I am watching the news and morning coffee. I happen to be in IT so I pretty much live online 

And guess what, it shows. I need to lose weight, my vision is changing to accommodate monitors, and my eating is not the best. 

So yes we need less. How many kids get out and play anymore? Remember our childhood, we were never in the house during the day. 

[gregintenn]

1 hour ago, n0rlf said:

It is one thing to scream to get rid of something because Obama did it and another to just want less government. 

I see a trend still here where the left leaning folks best on Trump for everything and the right leaning folks do the same towards Obama. 

Until folks can get beyond that there is no hope of meaningful change. Just spinning the wheels. Have you learned nothing from the last few decades. Stop drinking the Kool aid. 

I am for less government, a lot less. That is not in line with what the left wants. So I disagree with them. I like a few things Obama's team did. However I still think there is some underlying agenda on the part of the Democrat party. 

The other side needs to get out of people loves also, they are not any better. Stay out of people's bedrooms and trying to legislate morality.  

As for the net thing. I am off the mind it was not needed before and will show that as we get further down the line. Most of the folks I know including me have no real choices on providers other than two maybe three. All of them suck on price and service. 

Not to mention less internet would be a good thing for our society. 

Examples please?

[mikegideon]

1 hour ago, n0rlf said:

It is one thing to scream to get rid of something because Obama did it and another to just want less government. 

I see a trend still here where the left leaning folks best on Trump for everything and the right leaning folks do the same towards Obama. 

Until folks can get beyond that there is no hope of meaningful change. Just spinning the wheels. Have you learned nothing from the last few decades. Stop drinking the Kool aid. 

I am for less government, a lot less. That is not in line with what the left wants. So I disagree with them. I like a few things Obama's team did. However I still think there is some underlying agenda on the part of the Democrat party. 

The other side needs to get out of people loves also, they are not any better. Stay out of people's bedrooms and trying to legislate morality.  

As for the net thing. I am off the mind it was not needed before and will show that as we get further down the line. Most of the folks I know including me have no real choices on providers other than two maybe three. All of them suck on price and service. 

Not to mention less internet would be a good thing for our society. 

Here's the problem. I am against ANYTHING that puts technology regulation in the hands of a bunch of lawyers that can't even work their own cell phones. Republicans usually don't got out of their way to right the wrongs of evil capitalism, If they did, I would feel the same way. 

When it comes to Obama, when I see cumbersome, ineffective regulation, his face pops into my mind. Just can't help it.

[n0rlf]

Preexisting conditions and having your kids on the policy until 26. Lets them get through college and usuall kids are healthy so not a huge cost or impact to the insurance company.

Preexisting is a tough one. I am only for it if the person had insurance and had to switchwhen they changed jobs or had another life event. Going without until you get sick then trying to get insurance is a low down thing to do.

 

[mikegideon]

On 12/15/2017 at 8:51 AM, n0rlf said:

Preexisting conditions and having your kids on the policy until 26. Lets them get through college and usuall kids are healthy so not a huge cost or impact to the insurance company.

Preexisting is a tough one. I am only for it if the person had insurance and had to switchwhen they changed jobs or had another life event. Going without until you get sick then trying to get insurance is a low down thing to do.

 

You have gazillions of folks that are happy to do low down things. Seems to be more of them these days, given the entitlement mentality that was so carefully nurtured by you-know-who. College, healthcare, and internet bandwidth is a right.

Edited December 16, 2017 by mikegideon

[n0rlf]

People have gotten way past work hard for what you want. Now the entitlement idea has been ingrained in the kids in school and through their college years.

Kids complaining they have student loan debt that used most of the money to party. Now they want that debt forgiven? NOPE

I got all three of mine through school with no student loans. Now if they want to go further than a bachelors it is on them. They all worked jobs and paid their way. I can see the difference as they work hard to have good things. Too many millenials whining about getting healthcare free, internet free, college free. Hell we can do that no problem. Just raise the tax percentage to 50% and we can do it all.

One way or the other you will pay for it. Sad they did not get that in their classes.

Nothing in life is truly free. 

[JayC]

Most folks here know I'm about as libertarian, small government as anybody.  But, net neutrality was a good thing, and was needed regulation.

First thing most people don't realize is this regulation has been around for decades, since before AT&T was broken up.  It was called 'common carrier' back then, and has worked out well for us over the last 50+ years.  Telephone companies were basically required to connect all calls regardless of the destination.  So if you were an MCI long distance customer you didn't need to worry about BellSouth dumping your call on the floor because you weren't paying their high long distance rates.

Why do we need this regulation?  Because we don't have a free market.  In TN most citizens have a single or at most two broadband providers.  These are government backed monopolies or duopolies.  You can't enter the market place without government approval, and often times even if you get that approval the telephone and cable company fight tooth and nail to prevent you from having fair access to the public easements.  Don't believe, go read the games Comcast and AT&T played with Google Fiber in Nashville.

We have proof it's not a free market, when we look at bandwidth prices at data centers around the country...  These prices have been falling for the last 10 years.  Just 3 years ago the going rate was $1 USD per Mbps of bandwidth, today it's $0.15 USD per Mbps.  Has your cable internet bill be going up or down?  Of course up, and it's cheaper and cheaper for Comcast to provide you service today than just 3 years ago.  The only reason they get away with these price hikes?  Because you have no other choice.

Also, we've caught last-mile ISP's doing bad things with traffic over the last 10 years.  We've caught ISP's blocked VOIP providers to prevent customers from leaving their lucrative telephone service.  We've caught Comcast blocking traffic and then lying to customers about it.  We've also caught Comcast slowing down Netflix traffic and when you called to complain they recommended a streaming service they had an ownership stake in that wasn't intentionally slowed down.

So, we have government backed monopolies, who was violating the 'common carrier' status quo of the last 50 years, there isn't a free market, and we've finally removed all limitations on them from building a walled garden that you can't escape from.  And that is a good thing?

Just remember, the 'evil' net neutrality was also preventing these last mile ISP's from blocking websites such as the NRA, TGO, and other right wing 'extremists' sites.  Don't be surprised that the folks who are pressuring YouTube to take down conservative videos, don't start putting pressure on Comcast, Charter and AT&T to start blocking the 'terrorist' websites of the NRA etc.

[n0rlf]

Well it had been around for a couple years. My cost went sky high. I have one option other than satellite. 

My data plans on the cell get throttled if I use what they consider too much. In 2010i had an unlimited plan at the fastest level and no throttling. After Obama did good thing it slowed down and cost more. 

Keep in mind I do not live in the city. Out here we do not get much for choices. That may be why my experience is different than yours or someone else's. 

Either way it is not going to impact my wallet too much for the next year. I will give it time and see how it goes. 

If it turns out bad then we can best on them to fix it. Fix does not mean roll back though. Fix it the right way. 

We all shall see in the future. Until then it is academic and speculation. 

[2.ooohhh]

I'm more concerned with local TN law eliminating the local municipalities from offering broadband as a public utility to their residents. Chattanooga is one of the best networked cities in the country, and as soon as Comcast and AT&T could they lobbied and pushed through a law ensuring that it would be the only one in the state.