Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > Opinions & Editorials
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Opinions & Editorials Discuss No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web) at the General Forum; Originally Posted by saltwn there were changes in the works that net neutrality stopped. during the clinton era no one ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 11-28-2017, 06:09 PM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Esto perpetua
Posts: 77,077
Thanks: 54,268
Thanked 25,778 Times in 18,364 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by saltwn View Post
there were changes in the works that net neutrality stopped.
during the clinton era no one knew how the internet would grow. we didn't know what or if we needed laws about it.
like if when we first started using electricity, some electric companies may have wanted to charge more kwt/hr for a business than a home. we could see there may be a problem so electricity is regulated.

when in doubt I seek as many professional opinions as possible.

here are a few I found
also you can google your favorite streaming service or web hangout/ browser creator for their statement on net neutrality.





CNET is an American media website that publishes reviews, news, articles, blogs, podcasts and videos on technology and consumer electronics globally


https://www.cnet.com/news/net-neutra...rs-fight-back/
"Thousands of companies and organizations, including Google, Facebook and Reddit, want you to support the push for keeping the rules that govern the open internet".

Mozilla (creator of firefox) is a free-software community created in 1998 by members of Netscape. The Mozilla community uses, develops, spreads and supports Mozilla products, thereby promoting exclusively free software and open standards, with only minor exceptions.

https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/1...ty-in-the-u-s/
"Our position is clear: the end of net neutrality would only benefit Internet Service Providers (ISPs). That’s why we’ve led the charge on net neutrality for years to ensure everyone has access to the entire internet".




Netflix Issues Warning On The Dangers Of Ending Net Neutrality. Netflix issued a statement today lamenting a federal appeals court's decision to effectively end net neutrality rules.

"Without net neutrality, it means Internet providers can treat the content they deliver over the Web differently".



Net neutrality: Amazon among top internet firms planning day of action
https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...tarter-protest
Vimeo is a platform for video like youtube
Michael Cheah, general counsel of Vimeo, said: “Net neutrality made it possible for Vimeo, along with countless other startups, to innovate and thrive. The FCC’s proposed rollback of the 2015 open internet rules threatens to impede that innovation and allow a handful of incumbent ISPs to determine winners and losers.”
I hope that helps.

YouTube stars defend net neutrality in open letter to the FCC
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/6/15...ity-letter-fcc
“Our rapidly growing industry employs hundreds of thousands of people and yet it barely existed more than a decade ago,” reads the letter from the Internet Creators Guild, which represents online video makers. “As creators in this fast-moving industry, changes to the existing Net Neutrality rules would have an outsized impact on our field and jeopardize our livelihood.”
also here's an update on the other end of the spectrum.
Comcast hints at plan for paid fast lanes after net neutrality repeal



Comcast quietly deletes language about internet fast lanes

"Comcast has, up to this point, has been one of the loudest ISPs singing the praises of the FCC’s planned net neutrality rollback. Now it seems to be quietly backing off on at least a few of its more ardent promises: namely, that it won’t offer internet “fast lanes” which cost more".

video same subject:
__________________
Mueller is good at witch hunting. Its raining witches. America is GREAT.

Doreen E
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 11-30-2017, 08:10 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 16,153
Thanks: 9,136
Thanked 9,739 Times in 5,945 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post


Football is not a reasonable comparison to the strangle-hold monopoly that ISPs have on internet access.
With football, it's easily recognizable that one could shift to another sport if "football" is deemed boycott worthy.
With ISPs, there is no realistic alternative.

The clearest repudiation on the "market and public" mentality on this specific issue is the recognition that ISPs have absolutely the worst customer service around.
Internet Service Providers Are Now The Most Hated Companies In U.S.
If there was reasonable market competition, this type of crap would not exist.
But it does.
ISPs have a notorious reputation for hiking rates egregiously with no added benefit provided. Just because ...
This is how internet companies raise prices by $50 without anyone noticing – BGR

The ISPs have successfully created a monopoly for themselves and we can't just say "free market will fix it" when the evidence clearly shows the free market fixes nothing regarding ISPs.
Thanks to net neutrality Federal bureaucrats are going to fix ISP's customer service issues. What could go wrong with that? The Federal government has such a stellar record of superior customer service just look at the VATICAN. Oh wait.

The linked article shows an example of ISP'S charging by volume of usage not by targeting particular users. In a classic tragedy of the commons scenario there is no disincentive to stuffing as much data into the common pipeline as possible. Indeed, the great equalizer of net neutrality would force the bottom 98% of users to pay for infrastructure upgrades to accommodate the top 2% or live with a degraded service. As usual the noble sounding government regulation regime results in anything but neutrality.

Again, the problem net neutrality seeks to fix is based on conjecture. A crisis is always an opportunity to expand the size and scope of Federal government power. Since a real crisis doesn't exist one must be conjured up to support the hysterical demands for keeping net neutrality.
__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to AZRWinger For This Useful Post:
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 11-30-2017, 10:25 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,484
Thanks: 10,065
Thanked 15,212 Times in 9,220 Posts
Post Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Thanks to net neutrality Federal bureaucrats are going to fix ISP's customer service issues. What could go wrong with that? The Federal government has such a stellar record of superior customer service just look at the VATICAN. Oh wait.
I'm torn inbetween recognizing you just making up non-topical bullspit and you being sarcastic.
Which is it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
The linked article shows an example of ISP'S charging by volume of usage not by targeting particular users. In a classic tragedy of the commons scenario there is no disincentive to stuffing as much data into the common pipeline as possible. Indeed, the great equalizer of net neutrality would force the bottom 98% of users to pay for infrastructure upgrades to accommodate the top 2% or live with a degraded service. As usual the noble sounding government regulation regime results in anything but neutrality.
I'm still waiting for you to actually start talking about what net neutrality is or what I actually said.
You're doing neither.

I gave two articles.
One documenting that ISPs across the board are hated in this country. Demonstrating how "free market" does not work for ISPs.
The second documenting absurd price hikes with no correlative increase in quality or provided content to the consumer. Another example of how "free market" does not work for ISPs.
You talk about none of that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Again, the problem net neutrality seeks to fix is based on conjecture. A crisis is always an opportunity to expand the size and scope of Federal government power. Since a real crisis doesn't exist one must be conjured up to support the hysterical demands for keeping net neutrality.
No. It's not "conjecture".
I and others have been making the arguments for why net neutrality should exist.

I have whole-heartedly admitted some people have employed sensationalism on the topic.
I am not.
As such, can you try talking about the reasons why I have demonstrated net neutrality is needed?
Of course you can't.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 11-30-2017, 10:35 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,484
Thanks: 10,065
Thanked 15,212 Times in 9,220 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
My guess is that they would seek out a different ISP. That would force the ISP's into competition. Competition is a good thing in the free market.
I don't get how you guys keep saying "free market" or "competition" [b]and then completely ignore the evidence that ISPs have developed monopolies which destroy "free market" for the industry.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
Then that opens the door for another company or an individual to fill the void. Again, demand (the customers) will drive the service providers, not the other way around.
Again, I have already demonstrated that such hopes and prayers are meaningless.
You guys keep saying "free market" like a religious chant, but then refusing to look at the reality of the situation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
You don't have to tell me. I live in a rural area surrounded by corn fields. I cannot get Comcast, Time Warner or any of the other big name providers. However, we had a startup ISP that came into our area and offered their service. Within a year, another ISP came into the area and instead of slow crappy internet, my speeds more than tripled and the price dropped.
Apples and Oranges.
For rural areas, of course such things would be expected to happen.
What you need to appreciate is that if Comcast or Time Warner ever decide that they want to set up shop in your area, then that's the end of your competition and the introduction of the monopoly.
At that stage, your choices are essentially done.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
I have no idea, but usually when government gets involved and starts making rules to fix an issue (that they usually created in the first place), it comes back to bite the consumers in the rear. Think Community Reinvestment Act.
You guys need to stop thinking in talking points and actually LOOK at the situation.
All these years Net Neutrality existed and where were the consumer complaints about the government? NOWHERE.
Instead, you guys think that complaining about the government across the board is the automatic first answer.

And even before Net Neutrality, I've demonstrated that the spirit of the ideal was enforced in government policies preventing monopolies.
But modern right-wingers don't seem to have any appreciation for why monopolies are bad. Instead, you guys blindly sing the praises of "free market" while ignoring what monopolies do to it and proclaim "big government" is an inherent evil that should never be allowed to touch anything business.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 11-30-2017, 12:46 PM
lurch907's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Alaska, the greatest place on earth.
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,602
Thanks: 1,039
Thanked 2,944 Times in 1,712 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66
The choices for ISPs in most areas are ridiculously limited. As I've already demonstrated, customers hate Comcast but they use what they have no choice to use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurch907 View Post
Where is Comcast the only option?
???
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to lurch907 For This Useful Post:
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 11-30-2017, 01:07 PM
GetAClue's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Northern Ohio
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,778
Thanks: 3,413
Thanked 2,400 Times in 1,412 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
I don't get how you guys keep saying "free market" or "competition" [b]and then completely ignore the evidence that ISPs have developed monopolies which destroy "free market" for the industry.

Again, I have already demonstrated that such hopes and prayers are meaningless.
You guys keep saying "free market" like a religious chant, but then refusing to look at the reality of the situation.
You're right, the free market is a figment of our imagination ever since the government stuck their noses in and started picking winners and losers. However, the way to fix the issue of the market is not to demand more government, but quite the contrary.


Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Apples and Oranges.
For rural areas, of course such things would be expected to happen.
What you need to appreciate is that if Comcast or Time Warner ever decide that they want to set up shop in your area, then that's the end of your competition and the introduction of the monopoly.
At that stage, your choices are essentially done.
I think you have it backwards. In our rural area, the only providers are wireless and satellite. I would LOVE Time Warner or Comcast to come in and give me yet more choices. However, if it meant that they were not providing the service that I paid for, I would surely go back to the other guys. However, it won't happen as the big ISP's don't want to spend the money necessary to allow me to take advantage of their service.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
You guys need to stop thinking in talking points and actually LOOK at the situation.
All these years Net Neutrality existed and where were the consumer complaints about the government? NOWHERE.
Instead, you guys think that complaining about the government across the board is the automatic first answer.
When in doubt, I err or the side of less government in almost every situation. I really don't see a need to have the government step in an fix a problem that does not exist.


Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
And even before Net Neutrality, I've demonstrated that the spirit of the ideal was enforced in government policies preventing monopolies.
But modern right-wingers don't seem to have any appreciation for why monopolies are bad. Instead, you guys blindly sing the praises of "free market" while ignoring what monopolies do to it and proclaim "big government" is an inherent evil that should never be allowed to touch anything business.
Monopolies are simply opportunities for other interests to invest and gain market share at the expense of the monopoly in question.

Generally when there is a monopoly, they obtained that status by satisfying their customers needs at a mutually agreed rate of compensation; (think small town Wal-Mart). When the monopoly begins to leverage it's position at the expense of it's customers, it opens the door for others to step in and fill the void now opened by said monopoly.

Monopolies were bad because progressives deemed them as such.

But modern-left-winders don't seem to understand this basic tenant of supply side economics. They seem to view everything through the lens of government knows best.
__________________
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead - Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to GetAClue For This Useful Post:
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 11-30-2017, 02:30 PM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 16,153
Thanks: 9,136
Thanked 9,739 Times in 5,945 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
I'm torn inbetween recognizing you just making up non-topical bullspit and you being sarcastic.
Which is it?



I'm still waiting for you to actually start talking about what net neutrality is or what I actually said.
You're doing neither.

I gave two articles.
One documenting that ISPs across the board are hated in this country. Demonstrating how "free market" does not work for ISPs.
The second documenting absurd price hikes with no correlative increase in quality or provided content to the consumer. Another example of how "free market" does not work for ISPs.
You talk about none of that.



No. It's not "conjecture".
I and others have been making the arguments for why net neutrality should exist.

I have whole-heartedly admitted some people have employed sensationalism on the topic.
I am not.
As such, can you try talking about the reasons why I have demonstrated net neutrality is needed?
Of course you can't.
Correction to the remark about the Federal government providing customer service, the example should have been the veterans administration the VA . I don't always catch the spell checker changes.

To recap, the claim that poor customer service by ISP will be magically cured by bureaucrats enforcing net neutrality regulations is nonsense based on the Federal government's record of atrocious customer service.

I exposed the actual content of the article you linked did not document the abuse net neutrality is supposed to prevent. The concept of top 2% by data volume users paying more ought to be self evident but unsurprising you struggle with it.
__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 11-30-2017, 04:16 PM
lurch907's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Alaska, the greatest place on earth.
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,602
Thanks: 1,039
Thanked 2,944 Times in 1,712 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
To recap, the claim that poor customer service by ISP will be magically cured by bureaucrats enforcing net neutrality regulations is nonsense based on the Federal government's record of atrocious customer service.
AZ, you're using the wrong meaning of "customer service". See, the gov't doesn't do "service" the way it is normally thought of, think of it more along the lines of a cattle rancher bringing in an outside bull to "service" his cows.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 11-30-2017, 07:35 PM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Esto perpetua
Posts: 77,077
Thanks: 54,268
Thanked 25,778 Times in 18,364 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
1Who would be hitting them with "fees"? 2However, if they do, then why shouldn't those that use the service have to pay for it?3 Why should those of us that don't use it pay for it?
1 internet providers
2 they don't get a service from internet providers.
3 not sure what you're asking here. we already pay an internet provider to use the internet. it comes from a satellite and internet providers acquire a license to access it and provide a service to us that allows us to surf the internet. that signal does not speed up or slow down except in the case of natural anomalies like sun flares etc. In order to create a "fast track" to streaming channels a provider actually has to slow down its overall service. To extract this fee they will have to release their service back up to what everyone receives now. In other words they would block certain sites till they pony up. Of course the site must pass along the cost.
Providers will hawk their silver plan and it will just be what we receive now. if you opt for the bronze plan no decent video streaming. news or otherwise will be slow. no gaming.
__________________
Mueller is good at witch hunting. Its raining witches. America is GREAT.

Doreen E
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
end, neutrality”, not, the, web, wide, world, “net

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0