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; I'm still on the fence about net neutrality and didn't understand the details behind the furor over it but Knapp ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 04:39 AM
Lumara's Avatar
Belly Dance Queen
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Great Smoky Mountains
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,908
Thanks: 2,525
Thanked 2,385 Times in 1,159 Posts
Default No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

I'm still on the fence about net neutrality and didn't understand the details behind the furor over it but Knapp explains the reasons below, that Big Telecom and Big Data are the ones behind it. Besides this interesting info, the thing that struck me the most was when he said net neutrality is only 2 years old, and before that there was no problem like the hysterical fearmongers have been claiming there will be once it is gone.

Quote:
I get lots of email, including email from political advocacy groups trumpeting the Impending Doom of the Month. This month, that doom is the coming end of “Net Neutrality” at the hands of the Federal Communications Commission.

“Donald Trump and his corporate cronies are about to destroy the Internet,” writes Eden James of Democracy for America.

“[FCC chairman Ajit] Pai is paving the way for monopolistic ISPs to block and censor what we see online, and push anyone who can’t pay extra fees into ‘internet slow lanes,'” warns Carli Stevenson of Demand Progress.

Kurt Walters of Fight For The Future says that the impending end of the FCC’s “Net Neutrality” rules is a “plan to end the Internet as we know it …”

For some reason, those alarmist emails leave out the fact that “the Internet as we know it” — the World Wide Web — survived and thrived for nearly a quarter of a century without “Net Neutrality,” which was only imposed by a previous FCC a little more than two years ago.

But now the alarmists insist that axing the two-year-old rule will suddenly, for unspecified reasons, cause Internet Service Providers to divide the Internet into “fast” and “slow” lanes at the expense of their own customers and of small web site owners. Why ISPs would cut off their noses to spite their own faces in this way isn’t explained, probably because the prediction makes no sense at all and simply isn’t based in reality.

The fight over “Net Neutrality” is best understood as a duel between corporate interests — Big Telecom on one hand, Big Data on the other, with Big Data doing a better job of fooling activists into making a moral crusade out of the matter.

Big Data — specifically companies that deliver high-bandwidth services like streaming video (Netflix, Google’s YouTube service, et al.), or that consume lots of bandwidth simply by virtue of being very popular (Facebook and so forth) need ever larger pipes to shove that data at you. They want ISPs to shoulder the costs of building and fattening those pipes.

Big Telecom — the ISPs — want to charge the bandwidth hogs extra for getting such large amounts of data to your screen in a timely manner, so that Big Data bears the costs of building those pipes and keeping them uncongested.

If Big Data wins (“Net Neutrality”), ISP customers will end up paying more for Internet access. Everyone’s Internet access fees will go up (or at least remain higher than they otherwise would) and broadband Internet’s expansion into rural areas will slow down.

If Big Telecom wins, different customers (streaming video subscribers, web hosting users) will see our fees rise.

There’s no such thing as a free Internet. Someone’s going to pay to make it keep working. The only question is who. I’d rather pay an extra $5 a month for my web hosting and Netflix binges than shift that cost to my neighbor next door who checks her email once a day. Good riddance to “Net Neutrality.”
No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web) | The William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism

__________________
Every time someone tells me "You're gonna regret that in the morning" I sleep in until noon because I'm a problem solver.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Lumara For This Useful Post:
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 05:46 AM
jamesrage's Avatar
Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: A place where common sense still exist.
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,668
Thanks: 735
Thanked 906 Times in 586 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

This is one of those Net Neutrality opposition articles trying to claim well nothings happened so far so it ain't needed bull****. By the time ISPs start to block right leaning websites or squeezing out the competition it will be too late to enact change.
__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jamesrage For This Useful Post:
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 07:56 AM
Lumara's Avatar
Belly Dance Queen
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Great Smoky Mountains
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,908
Thanks: 2,525
Thanked 2,385 Times in 1,159 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
This is one of those Net Neutrality opposition articles trying to claim well nothings happened so far so it ain't needed bull****. By the time ISPs start to block right leaning websites or squeezing out the competition it will be too late to enact change.
The point the article brought out was that this wasn't a problem before net neutrality, so why would it suddenly be a problem without it?
__________________
Every time someone tells me "You're gonna regret that in the morning" I sleep in until noon because I'm a problem solver.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Lumara For This Useful Post:
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 09:13 AM
GetAClue's Avatar
Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Northern Ohio
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,372
Thanks: 1,825
Thanked 1,130 Times in 643 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

I am also on the fence on this one. I understand the point that jamesrage is making, but I also believe that competition in the market will prevent that from getting out of hand.

I am generally against making rules regarding something that someone may or may not do when the free market is involved. More often than not, rules put in place to prevent an action end up back firing and causing unintended consequences.
__________________
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead - Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 09:24 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 15,272
Thanks: 8,101
Thanked 8,768 Times in 5,434 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 jamesrage View Post
This is one of those Net Neutrality opposition articles trying to claim well nothings happened so far so it ain't needed bull****. By the time ISPs start to block right leaning websites or squeezing out the competition it will be too late to enact change.
We have already seen Leftists pressure ISP's into revoking service to websites they declare too offensive such as Sturmfront. There is no arguing Sturmfront content is repulsive but the point is net neutrality did nothing to stop the censorship.
__________________
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:
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 09:27 AM
Surly's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Midwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,253
Thanks: 2,797
Thanked 3,056 Times in 2,390 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

As I understand it a private company threw stormfront off it's server.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
We have already seen Leftists pressure ISP's into revoking service to websites they declare too offensive such as Sturmfront. There is no arguing Sturmfront content is repulsive but the point is net neutrality did nothing to stop the censorship.
__________________
Grab her by the *****, Vote Roy Moore.

-Donald
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Surly For This Useful Post:
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 11:04 AM
Manitou's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,873
Thanks: 184
Thanked 5,357 Times in 3,887 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Surly View Post
As I understand it a private company threw stormfront off it's server.

So net neutrality is the Oh Oh squad of the worldwide web! Ah-hah!

Private censorship is not government censorship, but I'm still looking at exactly what net neutrality is.

Last edited by Manitou; 11-27-2017 at 11:11 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 11:34 AM
Surly's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Midwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,253
Thanks: 2,797
Thanked 3,056 Times in 2,390 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

The last several days I have tried to read up and understand this topic. I still don't. But private censorship is not govt censorship. Seems to me like conservatives should be all for ISP's being allowed to censure anyone or group they want to. Kinda like bakers and wedding cakes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manitou View Post
So net neutrality is the Oh Oh squad of the worldwide web! Ah-hah!

Private censorship is not government censorship, but I'm still looking at exactly what net neutrality is.
__________________
Grab her by the *****, Vote Roy Moore.

-Donald
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Surly For This Useful Post:
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 11:39 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,962
Thanks: 9,861
Thanked 14,954 Times in 9,064 Posts
Post Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumara View Post
I'm still on the fence about net neutrality and didn't understand the details behind the furor over it but Knapp explains the reasons below, that Big Telecom and Big Data are the ones behind it. Besides this interesting info, the thing that struck me the most was when he said net neutrality is only 2 years old, and before that there was no problem like the hysterical fearmongers have been claiming there will be once it is gone.
I agree that there has been considerable fear-mongering on some sites (imgur, for example) regarding net neutrality.
But part of the problem is that it will be a problem incurred by a thousand paper cuts.

ISPs have relatively recently started experimenting with bandwidth / data caps on users. They have also only recently started breaching out into throttling territory. The net neutrality policy was essentially enacted as a predictive recognition of what has started.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/21/1...ality-title-ii

I don't understand how people can be "on the fence" on this issue. While some people's claimed consequences of fire and brimstone are out to lunch, others are much more reasonable.
The above scenario is entirely plausible. It should not be allowed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
We have already seen Leftists pressure ISP's into revoking service to websites they declare too offensive such as Sturmfront. There is no arguing Sturmfront content is repulsive but the point is net neutrality did nothing to stop the censorship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surly View Post
As I understand it a private company threw stormfront off it's server.
Surly pointed out the difference.
Your comment is like throwing an orange into an apple fight.
Net Neutrality was never designed to cover what you describe.
Furthermore, such an argument essentially boils down to throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

What Net Neutrality DOES do is prevent Comcast from throttling service to Sturmfrunt to a crawl. And with Net Neutrality revoked, it is entirely legal for Comcast to do that.


There have been some nonsensical comments on this forum (from others) talking about left-wing censorship TO right-wing sites. On one hand, I find these comments amusing because it demonstrates a fundamental failure to comprehend what net neutrality does.
If one is worried about such censorship, one would keep net neutrality.
On another hand, these comments reveal profound ignorant bleating as it's the Repubs who are revoking net neutrality.
Thus how can one pretend that the Dems (who aren't in power and who do favor net neutrality) will suddenly implement such power?
__________________
“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
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 11-27-2017, 11:45 AM
cnredd's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Gender: Male
Posts: 52,065
Thanks: 1,971
Thanked 31,796 Times in 18,583 Posts
Default Re: No, The End of “Net Neutrality” is Not The End of the World (Wide Web)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Surly View Post
The last several days I have tried to read up and understand this topic. I still don't. But private censorship is not govt censorship. Seems to me like conservatives should be all for ISP's being allowed to censure anyone or group they want to. Kinda like bakers and wedding cakes.
First, the issue with the bakers and wedding cakes IS government; not private...

And I DO agree that the government should stay out of it and let ISPs censor who they want...

Why?...For the same reason ESPN is losing subscribers by the hordes...The market and the public will decide who is being partisan a-holes and censoring for all the wrong reasons...
__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to cnredd For This Useful Post:
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 06:41 AM.


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

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0