posted by justincredibleYou got a link for this, corporate shill? But seriously, I'd love to read up on this.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/washingtonbytes/2017/03/02/capital-flight-from-broadband-in-the-title-ii-era/#c4e777335cf4 The direct links to the data collection are in that article.
I’m still not sure what the hell any of this means (if anyone wants to give me a ELI5 rundown that would be amazing), but I’m just hoping I can continue to jump on free porn sites wherever and whenever I want. That’s all.
posted by SportsAndLadyI’m still not sure what the hell any of this means (if anyone wants to give me a ELI5 rundown that would be amazing), but I’m just hoping I can continue to jump on free porn sites wherever and whenever I want. That’s all.
I think this sums up my level of overall comprehension, too. I see all these outraged reactions online, but I can't find my way to even care until someone gives me a reason to by doing something like jacking up my rates to do the stuff I usually do online. I trust the "sky is falling" reactions to this as much as I trusted them when it was QQ talking about the Obama presidency.
posted by SportsAndLadyI’m still not sure what the hell any of this means (if anyone wants to give me a ELI5 rundown that would be amazing), but I’m just hoping I can continue to jump on free porn sites wherever and whenever I want. That’s all.
simple explanation:
picture that you own a big box store and you're the exclusive seller of boxes in your area. you have an agreement with the box supplier that you may have as many (or as few) boxes as you want as long as you pay them a flat fee of $100 per month.
grandma comes to your store and buys some boxes. she's using them in her attic to store clothing. you decide to charge her $1 per box.
Joe Shmoe comes to your store looking to purchase boxes. Joe Shmoe is a douchebag and makes crafts and sells them on etsy. he plans to send the crafts to other people in your stores footprint, and he needs boxes to ship the items. Since your store also sells crafts, you decide to charge Joe Shmoe $2 per box since he is intruding on your turf.
Store Neturality is passed. It enforces a rule that you, as a store, cannot charge people different prices based on what they're using their boxes for. you're effectively barred from asking the customers what you're using boxes for.
In the above example, you're the ISP (comcast, spectrum, etc). Joe Shmoe is building a website in his basement called netflix. Store Neturality is the FFC regulations passed in 2015.
If Netflix was in favor of it, I doubt it was helping the little man in the first place. So the Dems who are anti big business are in favor of something that was only helping big business? Color me not worried at all, and certainly not the chicken little bullshit the people on social media were making it
posted by MontyBrunswickstore neuturality is passed. It enforces a rule that you, as a store, cannot charge people different prices based on what they're using their boxes for. you're effectively barred from asking the customers what you're using boxes for.
First off, price discrimination/gouging is illegal, has been and continues to be so without NN.
Second, blocking or price favoring certain apps/sites/services is also illegal under anti-competition/monopoly rules, as VZW and AT&T (among others) have paid hefty fines for in the past. Again, existing law has been handling this just fine.
Third, this fearmongering about paying different access fees for facebook, or Netflix, or Youtube or whatever is simply idiotic. Why would the ISP's bother with something so complicated when they could just go to metered pricing (which NN doesn't prevent them from doing, but let's drive them in that direction with unneccessary NN regulations)? Then they give you bandwidth for Comcast OnDemand for free (except you're paying $5 for it, so "free" or "favored" pricing would be very debatable). If you're not going to let me optimize the consumer experience with network mangement, if 4k UHD video takes up 80% of internet traffic and you tie my hands on pricing....then there's really no other solution and nothing more fair than metered pricing.
Again, use and enforce existing law. Modernize outdated laws for evolving technology. You don't need another regulatoy body and more govt bureacracy. NN is an absolute sledgehammer for something that has generally been working very well and needs minor tweaking as we go along.
By the way, 5G cellular data is just around the corner and VZW (and undoubtedly AT&T) are going to be offering it as a home broadband choice. So things are about to get much more competitive, which is another blow to the case for needing NN regulations.
posted by iclfan2If Netflix was in favor of it, I doubt it was helping the little man in the first place. So the Dems who are anti big business are in favor of something that was only helping big business? Color me not worried at all, and certainly not the chicken little bullshit the people on social media were making it
I also found it funny how people made this a big corp vs the little guys issue. Uhh you do realize Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Netflix, etc were funding the fight for NN right? Do people actually think they were fighting for NN for pure good and not to gain from this? If so, they are dumber and more delusional than I thought.
posted by gutFirst off, price discrimination/gouging is illegal, has been and continues to be so without NN.
Second, blocking or price favoring certain apps/sites/services is also illegal under anti-competition/monopoly rules, as VZW and AT&T (among others) have paid hefty fines for in the past. Again, existing law has been handling this just fine.
Third, this fearmongering about paying different access fees for facebook, or Netflix, or Youtube or whatever is simply idiotic. Why would the ISP's bother with something so complicated when they could just go to metered pricing (which NN doesn't prevent them from doing, but let's drive them in that direction with unneccessary NN regulations)? Then they give you bandwidth for Comcast OnDemand for free (except you're paying $5 for it, so "free" or "favored" pricing would be very debatable). If you're not going to let me optimize the consumer experience with network mangement, if 4k UHD video takes up 80% of internet traffic and you tie my hands on pricing....then there's really no other solution and nothing more fair than metered pricing.
Again, use and enforce existing law. Modernize outdated laws for evolving technology. You don't need another regulatoy body and more govt bureacracy. NN is an absolute sledgehammer for something that has generally been working very well and needs minor tweaking as we go along.
I'm not arguing for or against it. IMO, the FCC should be the one enforcing the rules instead of the FTC because the FCC regulates communication, and the internet is a backbone for communication (telephone, voip, etc).
posted by gutBy the way, 5G cellular data is just around the corner and VZW (and undoubtedly AT&T) are going to be offering it as a home broadband choice. So things are about to get much more competitive, which is another blow to the case for needing NN regulations.
I agree that eventually this will be the go-to for internet access for everyone.
posted by like_thatI also found it found how people made this a big corp vs the little guys issue. Uhh you do realize Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Netflix, etc were funding the fight for NN right? Do people actually think they were fighting for NN for pure good and not to gain from this? If so, they are dumber and more delusional than I thought.
Right. And I believe Netflix actually reversed course on NN. Likely because it could potentially hurt them investing in infrastructure to deliver speeds and bandwidth to its consumers. Their original NN argument with Comcast/VZW/etc was really about trying to strong-arm the ISP's into paying for investment to handle the massive demands of Netflix video content.
One of my biggest beefs with NN is it completely ignores the reality that 4k UHD video is coming, which requires between 2-2.5X the bandwidth of 1080p video. Netflix and Youtube alone, I believe, account for nearly 50% of internet traffic. So we're talking potentially north of 70-80% of internet traffic for UHD video. That's a HUGE issue when talking about delivering affordable internet speeds to people who don't watch much video online, much less UHD. So the challenge becomes passing those costs onto the consumers of that video, and there are a variety of ways to do that - and we should see how the free market accomplishes that before getting in the way.
It's further complicated with the inevitability of "cable" ultimately being piped thru the internet instead (I believe that is how AT&T u-verse does it). In truth, discounts on bundled services somewhat address the imbalance (i.e., you might pay $60 for internet plus $10 for Hulu, but $80 for internet and cable bundled together). And I see absolutely nothing unfair or "anti-NN" with bundled packages.
IMO, the whole NN argument is somewhat backwards. The big players don't pay MORE, and almost never do in any industry. They get volume discounts and leverage their size to get price concessions. Investments by the big players have mainly trickled down to benefit ALL in terms of overall value of service vs. price. You get in the way of investment, and then supply starts lagging behind demand and prices will increase for EVERYONE. Netflix, Google, the ISP's and other big players duking it out over how to share those investment costs is not a NN issue and I'm not sure we need to regulate those negotiations.
The other comical thing is the whole pricing boogeyman. Granted, to be fair, most NN proponents seem to be more concerned with blocking and throttling. But Netflix, for example, pays just PENNIES to stream each movie. The cost of licensing content is a far bigger share of their operating costs.
And so when I see mergers between big ISP's and content providers, THAT is when alarm bells start going off. Because then you might only be able to rent that movie if you have AT&T, and maybe AT&T isn't offered in your area. Bandwidth is pretty much a commodity. NN misses the forest thru the trees in that CONTENT is where the pricing and power is. I don't have to block or throttle Netflix - I just won't license my Disney & MGM content to Netflix.
I do see a la carte pricing in the future, and I have serious doubts that's going to be a net positive for the consumer. I think you do a little better with the big guys negotiating volume discounts. Having a Netflix account and then having to pay additional fees to unlock Fox, MGM, Universal, and HBO content doesn't sound like I'll be getting better value.
Why do i feel like everyone was for net neutrality when Obama was president?
posted by FatHobbitWhy do i feel like everyone was for net neutrality when Obama was president?
On this site or in general?
posted by like_thatOn this site or in general?
On this site i thought
https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/19/net-neutrality-bill-ban-blocking-throttling/
"Proposed net neutrality bill would ban blocking and throttling. But that's pretty much the only difference between it and the FCC's order."
LMFAO. That's like 95% of what people have been crying about and blaming the demise of the internet on. "Useless idiot" is no longer sufficient to describe these people....I'm going with "big gubmit cuckold".
Checking in to see if you all have survived repeal of NN?
Elon is making moves on the internet game https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/02/20/test-satellites-for-spacexs-broadband-megaconstellation-set-for-launch/. With this, google fiber slowly expanding (it would be quicker without bureaucratic meddling), and the 5G we will have many more options in the future.
BTW, in DC of all places the competition has been great. We have a few ISPs (one smallish business, comcast, verizon, and i believe a satellite company option) and they all have lowered their prices since NN repeal. I currently use comcast, and verizon has been trying to get me to switch over for years. Previously their internet (i just stream) was $65/month for 25 mbps. Now they are offering people 100 mbps internet for $33.99/month AND a year subscription to Netflix. I stand by my original argument in this thread. If you live in an area that has limited options don't cry for NN. Instead tell your local politicians to quit trying to "protect" you by making back door deals with ISPs and cable companies that make it difficult for other companies to penetrate the market.
Saved for now
posted by Verbal KintSaved for now
I would be surprised if the house passes it.
Net Neutrality doesn't end under the current rules and regulations until June 11th, so while amusing the cartoon is extreme hyperbole.
posted by like_that
Checking in to see if you all have survived repeal of NN?
posted by like_thatI would be surprised if the house passes it.
I would be as well, though I haven't read projections/Number Crunching. It has EXTREME public favorability though, last thing I read on NTY was in the high 70%s. Hard to make a rational argument for not passing it.
posted by Commander of AwesomeI would be as well, though I haven't read projections/Number Crunching. It has EXTREME public favorability though, last thing I read on NTY was in the high 70%s. Hard to make a rational argument for not passing it.
Plenty of rational arguments for not passing it. I hope they don't.
Regardless if it passes or not, at least it is being done the right way.
LMFAO, can't make this shit up. NN just more fake hysteria from the left. Meanwhile, none of them seem to understand or be concerned with mega-mergers of providers and content owners (i.e. Time Warner, 21st Century Fox, etc).
https://www.engadget.com/2018/06/15/comcast-no-longer-throttling-heavy-users-speed/
posted by Commander of AwesomeNet Neutrality doesn't end under the current rules and regulations until June 11th, so while amusing the cartoon is extreme hyperbole.
Hand up, I realized that after the fact (probably a few weeks after I posted it), but it was 4 months ago and it never crossed my mind to find this thread and correct it.
A few days after the actual NN repeal I stand by that cartoon though.
posted by gutLMFAO, can't make this shit up. NN just more fake hysteria from the left. Meanwhile, none of them seem to understand or be concerned with mega-mergers of providers and content owners (i.e. Time Warner, 21st Century Fox, etc).
https://www.engadget.com/2018/06/15/comcast-no-longer-throttling-heavy-users-speed/
You mean with corporate tax cuts + repealing a law that disincentivizes businesses to invest in improving technology = Comcast improving their technology?
Crazy concept.