I’m mixed on this topic. On one hand, whenever I see absolute scum in the streets protesting something, my spidey senses kick in and force me to take the opposite position. Also, my kids came home yesterday and starting spewing a bunch of talking points they read on their Instagram feeds, which was without a doubt pushed by propagandists.
As far as I can tell, this takes the power away from the dictators at Facebook, Google, and Netflix and hands said power to the corporate giants at Verizon, Comcast, and other service providers. From my vantage point, I do not view the current hegemony as pro free speech. In fact, I believe FB, GOOG, and TWTR to be very authoritarian in the manner they censor speech. Ergo, I have zero empathy for anything that hurts them.
The FCC is going to repeal net neutrality rules today and there’s nothing you can do about it. It’s their pipes and infrastructure. They should have more control, not the gargoyles at Google.
Pai’s proposal marks a victory for big internet service providers such as AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc that opposed the rules and gives them sweeping powers to decide what web content consumers can get. It is a setback for Google parent Alphabet Inc and Facebook Inc, which had urged Pai not to rescind the rules.
Michael Powell, a former FCC chairman who heads a trade group representing major cable companies and broadcasters, told reporters that internet providers would not block content because it would not make economic sense and consumers would not stand for it.
“They make a lot of money on an open internet,” Powell said, adding it is “much more profitable” than a closed system. “This is not a pledge of good-heartedness, it’s a pledge in the shareholders’ interest.”
Democrats have said the absence of rules would be unacceptable and that they would work to overturn the proposal if it is approved. Advocates of the net neutrality rules also plan a legal challenge.
Pai’s proposal is “like letting the bullies develop their own playground rules,” said Senator Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat.
Many Republicans back Pai’s proposal but want Congress to write net neutrality rules. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the FCC would “return the internet to a consumer-driven marketplace free of innovation-stifling regulations.”
A group of nearly 20 state attorneys general asked the FCC to delay the vote until the issue of fake comments is addressed.
I’m open minded. Tell me why I should side with the scum in the streets and fight for Google?
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
If there are rules, the rule should be for users to get what they pay for and get it in abundance w/i their bandwidth.
It’s about more than GOOG, FB, NFLX, AMZN etc. If electricity wasn’t regulated, we’d all be paying 3 to 5 times what we pay now. Ditto internet. It’s a fucking utility, like water and electric. You want to hand over power to the Cable bullshitters just to spite “scum”, but it will affect everyone, not just the dirt people. You really need to find a better Thesis than that, Dickhead.
I’ve been educating myself on Obama’s last minute 400 page rule book for net neutrality and it’s a scam.
Essentially, it mandates ISPs to get government license to operate. It literally gives govt control.
No thanks. I’ll take my chance with free markets, you absolute retarded hand puppet.
Nah it’s more like the companies with the big pockets ergo all the Big Tech firms you just described will be able to crush any competitors, the little guys, ergo you smalltown blogger business boys. They can afford to pay for speeding up their services. This isn’t a win for free speech.
I want a free, fast Internet. It does not seem to be a step in the right direction to give a small, powerful oligopoly of internet providers license to ransom Netflix, Google, Facebook, all the way down to mom and pops for the privilege of being on the internet in unrestricted fashion. Also, just like Microsoft’s problems with forcing Office on Windows users and mandating Windows-only to PC manufacturers because they could, when these same Verizons and Comcasts of the world are creating and shilling their own content, it seems to be a clear conflict of interest when they are allowed to cripple their content generating competitors whenever and however they want.
All that said, go for it, Verizon and Comcast. Google will become a competitor in the internet provider market as they were already beginning to do. I would dump XFuckYounity for Google Fiber in a heartbeat if it was made available to me. You might see Netflix Internet or Facebook Internet next. Our Internet access already costs many multiples of what it should, many times what it costs in much less developed countries, and in many cases is much slower than elsewhere in the world. I believe the free market and the Internet will find a way to route around the problem.
I’m also 100% with you that government control and strict regulation would be a disastrous step in the wrong direction, as it is for most things.
Net neutrality is also why my Comcast bill is $250 / month. Why? Because I’m subsidizing the kid next door on his XBox playing video games on the internet all night. FUCK THAT!
I would love a pay-per-use model. I agree that the internet pipes have become a utility / commodity. You would be pissed if you had to pay $200 / month in electric if you were away on vacation and your neighbor was running his x-mas lights 24 hours a day.
Yeah I’m sure Comcast is just waiting for the opportunity to let you pay them less. LOL!!
You win for dumbest shit posted in the comments today.
Electricity is a utility already and you pay for what you use.
Net nutrality is about charging *prodcucers* of content, not consumers. So now you wil lstill be subsidizng your neighbor, but people lik FLy will be charged more for his blog, especailyl if he says something that Verizon, Comcast, etc. doesn’t like.
Power was deregulated in Texas a decade or so ago and the free market was able to dictate cheaper prices, but there are more hands competing for that pot. With internet there are only 2 or 3 choices or at apartments where there is usually only one choice they are able to price fix and gouge the holy hell out of us. It’s redonk. I don’t know what the right answer is…
That’s not how I understand net neutrality at all.
From what I’ve read in my limited time for this, it all comes down to major corporations buying their way to service via ISP’s. ISP’s are granted power to regulate internet traffic as they wish via repeal.
If you’re an international online service provider or store, and a domestic competitor pays an ISP for better service (or service at all) to their product/website, it will undoubtedly pose a huge advantage for the competitor who “pays up” to the gatekeepers, IE ISP’s.
Or the more extreme speculations are situations in which media outlets are given ‘preferred’ status. IE Comcast gives access to ONLY NBC, Time Warner gives access ONLY to CNN, etc.
I’m already hugely skeptical on “free markets” being at work in this industry, given the U.S. has absolutely atrocious internet compared to other countries worldwide.
Just because they are repealing the rules and in theory could allow that behavior doesn’t mean the cable cos will do it. The FTC Head doesn’t necessarily support fast lanes but the net neutrality law was bullshit and a huge overreach and therefore must be repealed in total rather than picking and choosing what parts to keep. I believe cable cos will either self regulate or if they do decide to pursue fast lanes then we could easily see regulators take action. Many media outlets are focusing on this possibility because it sounds bad but I think the likelihood of it happening are very low.
Why on earth would the likelihood be low? You have products like Netflix and Hulu using massive amounts of bandwidth and these ISP’s currently don’t charge premiums to use them. With repeal, what’s stopping them from selling out to the highest bidder? You want NFLX? Pay this. You want Hulu? Pay this. You want HBO GO? Great, we offer this package with it.
You already see these type of restrictions going on based on where you live. I can’t get Fios where I live because Time Warner owns the area. It’s between Time Warner or XYZ Local company I’ve never heard of. The illusion of choice.
The reason you only have Time Warner in your area is because Verizon and other local companies stopped rolling out their network because of Net Neutrality.
They do not want to build a network, then have it regulated by the government or be told to let other carries use it.
This happened to phone companies many years ago, and this is why our internet access as well as cellular coverage is so far behind much of the world!
The whole thing is really about too heavy handed government regulation, it stifles natural growth and prosperity.
LOL @ SELF-REGULATE where the fuck did you come up with that
Verizon stopped building it’s FIOS network because of net neutrality laws, so did many other local providers. They did not want to build out a fiber network, with the risk that other providers could run service on it like what happened to the overhead phone lines many years ago. The result in many areas of the country left only a single cable provider or satellite provider to provide Internet and TV access, and stifled competition between carriers. Cost to the consumer jacked way up $200-300 when previously customers were paying $60-100.
So net neutrality is not protecting the consumer, it is protecting Google, FB, Twitter NFLX etc. And over the last few years they these companies have become the most powerful companies in the US and are indeed stifling free speech to push their political and business agendas.
GOOG, FB, TWTR. NFLX etc will not be stopped with neutrality defeat. They will just raise their prices to cover the extra pipe costs. All internet-related things will increase in cost to the consumer. Wait and see. And there is plenty of net access except in rural areas. Farmer John can use a dish.
Let them raise their prices. One could argue that this would also benefit the consumer in the long run due to competition.
NFLX raises their price too much, users could go to HULU or Amazon Prime. If GOOG starts charging for email google docs etc, Microsoft would be more than happy accept disgruntled GOOG users with their office365.
Or use LibreOffice.
My concern is that the current version of ‘net neutrality’ subsidises the big boys like NFLX, GOOG etc. As an analogy think of cable TV and bundling.
I agree with Fly, however, that hundreds of pages of regulations is not a solution.
The govt got control either way. WTF planet are you on?? NSA* & CIA* will use the net pipes to do anything they want, regardless of who owns them. Any Cable exec that disagrees will disappear, and wake up dead in Turdistan. Instead, you will have Corporate greed hand up your alleyway. At first, it will look ok, like, “See, we didn’t raise rates!” (Yet). In a year or two, that hand just keeps reaching up farther and farther. You like, eh?
*And they are the govt, not those pasty-face fat tards in congress, etc. Those fuckers don’t know a cable modem from a goddamn toaster.
The powers that be have successfully pulled the wool over your eyes.
Or over your eyes? Easy to say, hard to prove.
I’ve rationalized this very thoroughly and have decided that if any hipster loving, rainbow wearing, whiney tity baby types hate something so much it has to be something I’m for. Five years ago I would have been in the streets protesting over this, but since that time I feel like the internet and the culture it has spawned has done nothing good for me or the world, so fuck it and them.
Internet hasn’t done anything good for you? Must have been a really bad 5 years. Sorry man.
Shove it up your ass
You seem to be suffering the effects of net neutering.
Welcome to your new internet with fast lanes and slow lanes. It will look familiar to those of you beyond a certain age:
http://i.imgur.com/BD7Vcih.gif
IF TRUMP BECOMES PRESIDENT WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE
IF WE DON’T SIGN THE PARIS GLOBAL WARMING PACT WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE
IF REPUBLICANS REPEAL OBAMACARE WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE
IF REPUBLICANS PASS A BUDGET (FIRST ONE IN 30 YRS) WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE
IF WE DON’T ALLOW MUSLIMS INTO OUR COUNTRY WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE
IF WE GIVE “FEDERAL” LAND BACK TO THE STATES WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE
IF FCC REPEALS NET NEUTRALITY ACT WERE ALL GONNA DIE
ok so we’re dead already, what happens next, and for you Catlics, assignment to heaven or hell?
If Hillary becomes president, we’re all gonna die…
If they ban assault rifles, we’re all gonna die…
If we don’t repeal Obamacare, we’re all gonna die…
If we allow Muslims into the country, we’re all gonna die…
If we don’t drop corporate tax rates, we’re all gonna die…
And my favorite:
If we regulate and reduce toxic chemicals and pollutants, we’re all (ironically) gonna die..
Sheesh…
I am surprised by your viewpoint, Fly, coming from a small web entrepreneur like yourself. Net neutrality is a red herring for the much bigger issue that will determine the future of our open internet. The real question is whether the internet is a utility service (Title II Regulated) or if it is only an information service (Title I Regulated) for entertainment and educational purposes only. From my viewpoint within the telecom industry, only a politician could claim in this day and age that the internet is not a utility service. Try telling that to a business owner when they cannot process credit card transactions, or when their VoIP phone systems go down, or when they are cut off from their corporate server. In the modern business world, the internet is as critical to daily operations as electric service.
Do you really think the FCC under Ajit Pai has the interests of an open internet at heart? I would suggest hearing it straight from the horse’s mouth:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHvzxZXATr8
The large web companies you are concerned about obviously do not want to pay more for access to their customers, yet these giant companies stand to benefit the most from the moat this will enable them to construct around their businesses. As our internet pipes get ever more congested with traffic (especially video streams – a massive bandwidth hog), the sites that can afford to pay up will receive priority access to the bandwidth, while small upstart businesses that can not afford to pay will not be accessible. This is contrary to current FIFO practices for most web services that allow homebrew servers the same open access to the market as mainframe servers.
The danger is letting the big boys lobby the government for favourable regulations.
And the vote is done. Permanent fag box – https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_1eYLC2Augk/maxresdefault.jpg
Riotact – I see your reading comprehension is still at a 4th grade level. No child left behind… I get it