Google Fiber Confirmed Coming to Nashville

[10-Ring]

I'll say this about Google...Their customer service is top notch.  I had dealings with them a few months back and placed a phone call, I wasn't placed on hold, and I talked to a really friendly English speaking guy that got my problem solved quickly.  Last time I called Comcast I was put on hold for 17 minutes before I was connected to an Indian that I couldn't understand. 

[tnguy]

I'm hoping we'll get to move to a distributed peer-to-peer mesh type network. I'm starting to look into it more seriously as I think we're getting towards the technology and penetration level that's necessary to get something off the ground.

[enfield]

I'm hoping we'll get to move to a distributed peer-to-peer mesh type network. I'm starting to look into it more seriously as I think we're getting towards the technology and penetration level that's necessary to get something off the ground.

The gov is incapable of making this happen. They're long on arrogance and short on ability. Plus, they don't care if you have internet as long as their favorite class of voters is voting for them. Their objective is to stay in power, not to make you happy.

[tnguy]

The idea is to cut the government out of the loop :)

[btq96r]

You'll all love a government-regulated internet. You'll be lucky to have dsl, but you'll pay for premium service. The gov couldn't run a cathouse and make money.

 

That's for the Net Neutrality debate, which I agree is going to come down to best of the worst options..  This is about variety in the amount of ISP's, some of whom have what I like to call inkblot monopolies by region.  The development of local ISP's, like the one in Chattanooga, is a good thing to me.  This ruling will only make sure state laws can't shut them down for no reason other than the ISP lobby is willing to pay for it.

[Mark A]

The idea is to cut the government out of the loop :)

And a truly wide open internet is one of the best ways to accomplish that. I hope no one is surprised by the net neutrality vote today. Slower service at a higher price is in our future. There is a plan and for all the public bellyaching the big companies are doing about it you know they are on board or it wouldn't be happening in the first place.

 

As much as I think Google is as deep in the middle of the political mess as can be at least it is ostensibly a free market offering.

[ProfEngr]

Can you say, 0bummer Exemptions? Just like with ACA.

[btq96r]

On 1/29/2015 at 8:46 AM, JayC said:

For the record, Google isn't going to record what you do on the Internet, because that would be a violation of the Communications Act of 1996, service providers are only allowed to monitor traffic for network management, and isn't allowed to retain any of that data for purposes other than network management....  

 

On 1/29/2015 at 7:10 PM, btq96r said:

Point made on the web traffic analytics, but I'm not about to put it past them to try and get that rewritten to their favor someday.  Google is very well represented on K Street these days.

Well, two years later, it seems that pesky law preventing Google (and the rest of the ISP's) from collecting internet use data for non-network management uses is on the ropes.  Wonder if our duly elected man of the people who's draining the swamp will veto this one or not.

https://news.vice.com/story/the-gop-effort-to-let-broadband-companies-sell-your-data-is-picking-up-steam

 

[mikegideon]

1 hour ago, btq96r said:

 

Well, two years later, it seems that pesky law preventing Google (and the rest of the ISP's) from collecting internet use data for non-network management uses is on the ropes.  Wonder if our duly elected man of the people who's draining the swamp will veto this one or not.

https://news.vice.com/story/the-gop-effort-to-let-broadband-companies-sell-your-data-is-picking-up-steam

 

Another "interpretation" piece. Where is the bill? 

[btq96r]

3 hours ago, mikegideon said:

Another "interpretation" piece. Where is the bill? 

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-115sjres34is/pdf/BILLS-115sjres34is.pdf

Don't let the term "Joint Resolution" mislead you, this legislation is being done through the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to reject a proposed rule by a federal agency if the joint resolution can pass within 60 legislative days (ie: Congresses own calender is the timeline).

 

And this is what Senator Flake (and a lot of other Republicans) want to block from being implemented...at the behest of the fat cat ISP companies (Comcast, Google, et al...) filling the party, campaign, and PAC coffers

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-12-02/pdf/2016-28006.pdf

 

The reason this is only being done now as opposed to all the time when one party controls the legislative branch, is that in order for this process to work, Congress needs the President to sign these joint resolutions, or have enough strength to survive a veto.  So, with a Republican Congress, and a (sort of) Republican President, they're going through a lot that falls within that "60 legislative day" window...and there is a lot of real time covered since Congress didn't actually convene very much in the latter half of 2016...to roll back some of what the Obama administration pushed through the federal register in their final months.

Now, we can debate how that's a good thing for a whole host of other issues (specifically any ATF efforts), but the reason I bumped up this old thread is because I was specifically refrencing the internet privacy implications this would have.  "Big data" is big business, and the ISP's want Congress to take down barriers between them and your private information so they can churn it into cash.

Edited March 11, 2017 by btq96r

[mikegideon]

Wow. I have a couple of friends that are FCC lawyers. I'll see if I can get one of them to distinguish it from the typical... "they are evil corporations, so we need to bury them in bull#### regulation, because they are responsible for my personal financial problems".

The FCC has always been pretty good about public comment review. Not sure they are out to play dirty politics

Edited March 12, 2017 by mikegideon

[btq96r]

Wow. I have a couple of friends that are FCC lawyers. I'll see if I can get one of them to distinguish it from the typical... "they are evil corporations, so we need to bury them in bull#### regulation, because they are responsible for my personal financial problems".
The FCC has always been pretty good about public comment review. Not sure they are out to play dirty politics

The FCC administrator President Trump has in place has been quite busy and flying under the radar. He's already gotten to work tearing up the track that was going to unlock set-top boxes so consumers wouldn't be stuck "renting" a box from the cable providers if they wanted an alternative. Along with withdrawing the FCC's position about phone rates for prisoners making calls, and he isn't a fan at all of the 2015 decision to treat and regulate broadband as a utility.

Some topics about the new FCC chair for discussion with your friends.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk just to give Oh Shoot something to be grumpy about.

[mikegideon]

9 minutes ago, btq96r said:

 

The FCC administrator President Trump has in place has been quite busy and flying under the radar. He's already gotten to work tearing up the track that was going to unlock set-top boxes so consumers wouldn't be stuck "renting" a box from the cable providers if they wanted an alternative. Along with withdrawing the FCC's position about phone rates for prisoners making calls, and he isn't a fan at all of the 2015 decision to treat and regulate broadband as a utility.

Some topics about the new FCC chair for discussion with your friends.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk just to give Oh Shoot something to be grumpy about.
 

 

From what I'm hearing, a lot of my friends like Pai. But, we're all way more concerned about broadcasting than anything else. No matter what they do with the Internet, my life won't change much.

[btq96r]

No matter what they do with the Internet, my life won't change much.

The internet is the way information will flow, and people will be cataloged for the rest of the century. I'm quite concerned with it considering I plan to live at least halfway through it.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk just to give Oh Shoot something to be grumpy about.

[mikegideon]

5 hours ago, btq96r said:

 

The internet is the way information will flow, and people will be cataloged for the rest of the century. I'm quite concerned with it considering I plan to live at least halfway through it.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk just to give Oh Shoot something to be grumpy about.
 

 

You have a lot more faith in the government than I do. At this point, I expect a lot less regulation. We are way too short on Democrats to have it go any other way. 

Edited March 12, 2017 by mikegideon

[btq96r]

So, that legislation I mentioned a few posts back is clear of Congress, and on it's way to the White House for the President's signature or veto.  We'll see if he's still wanting to drain the swamp, or sign a bill to help out those poor, beaten down, cable companies and ISP's.