(11-21-2017 05:28 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 05:19 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 04:00 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The internet is a utility.

It should be treated like one.

Utilities usually don't have any competition.

Do ISPs have any real competition? Not In my area for sure.

I have had three different ISP's over the past five years and I use them to leverage lower prices every 18 months or so.

(02-06-2017 09:53 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 09:05 AM)LeFlâneur Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 08:58 AM)Niner National Wrote:  A big win for telecoms. A big loss for consumers. The internet is going to get a lot more expensive for everyone.

So allowing the telecoms to give away free stuff is bad for consumers. Got it.

No it allows them to prioritize data, which can favor their own services over competing services. Someday, they could tell georgia_tech_swagger that he has to pay an additional fee or they'll slow his website speed down. Website speed is an increasingly important component to how websites are ranked in search engine results because it is the most important factor in user experience. Google has studied this extensively and slow websites have considerably worse user metrics because people are impatient.

Comcast already did this with Netflix and other content providers. If the cost of delivering content goes up, the price to the consumer goes up.

Your ISP sells you an internet speed, but net neutrality essentially allows them to not give you the promised internet speed if the content provider also isn't paying to guarantee that speed. They're double dipping.

Since in many markets, ISPs hold a monopoly, or if you're lucky, a duopoly, there isn't competition. They are a utility and should be regulated as such to protect consumers and businesses from price gouging.

It would be interesting to see what happens with mobile internet data plans... I could say dump cable internet for mobile internet.... you can already tie hot spots to your cell phone so...

(11-21-2017 05:28 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 05:19 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 04:00 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The internet is a utility.

It should be treated like one.

Utilities usually don't have any competition.

Do ISPs have any real competition? Not In my area for sure.

I have three choices here

(11-21-2017 08:57 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 09:53 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 09:05 AM)LeFlâneur Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 08:58 AM)Niner National Wrote:  A big win for telecoms. A big loss for consumers. The internet is going to get a lot more expensive for everyone.

So allowing the telecoms to give away free stuff is bad for consumers. Got it.

No it allows them to prioritize data, which can favor their own services over competing services. Someday, they could tell georgia_tech_swagger that he has to pay an additional fee or they'll slow his website speed down. Website speed is an increasingly important component to how websites are ranked in search engine results because it is the most important factor in user experience. Google has studied this extensively and slow websites have considerably worse user metrics because people are impatient.

Comcast already did this with Netflix and other content providers. If the cost of delivering content goes up, the price to the consumer goes up.

Your ISP sells you an internet speed, but net neutrality essentially allows them to not give you the promised internet speed if the content provider also isn't paying to guarantee that speed. They're double dipping.

Since in many markets, ISPs hold a monopoly, or if you're lucky, a duopoly, there isn't competition. They are a utility and should be regulated as such to protect consumers and businesses from price gouging.

It would be interesting to see what happens with mobile internet data plans... I could say dump cable internet for mobile internet.... you can already tie hot spots to your cell phone so...

this....

no differently that when all tech 'comes out', I play the patient game.....

We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

(11-21-2017 05:52 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  My choices are Comcast Xfinity, or Hughes Net Satellite Internet (which is insanely slow and expensive).

I'm afraid we're gonna start seeing ISPs charging extra for unencumbered access to various sites. For example, do you plan on streaming a lot of Netflix and Hulu? That'll be an extra $5 a month? Planning on using social media? Fork over another $7.99. You like streaming Pandora or Spotify on your commute? I'm gonna need about $3.50...



Apparently that how it's like in Portugal now that they removed net neutrality.

http://www.businessinsider.com/net-neutr...cc-2017-11

Since everyone is cutting the cord, time to get that money back with bundled internet.

The NY AG has uncovered a massive scheme to compromise the FCC's open comment policy regarding Net Neutrality by impersonating 100,000's of real Americans. Meanwhile, the FCC is basically ignoring the evidence.

Quote:Specifically, for six months my office has been investigating who perpetrated a massive scheme to corrupt the FCC’s notice and comment process through the misuse of enormous numbers of real New Yorkers’ and other Americans’ identities. Such conduct likely violates state law — yet the FCC has refused multiple requests for crucial evidence in its sole possession that is vital to permit that law enforcement investigation to proceed.

In April 2017, the FCC announced that it would issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking concerning repeal of its existing net neutrality rules. Federal law requires the FCC and all federal agencies to take public comments on proposed rules into account — so it is important that the public comment process actually enable the voices of the millions of individuals and businesses who will be affected to be heard. That’s important no matter one’s position on net neutrality, environmental rules, and so many other areas in which federal agencies regulate.

In May 2017, researchers and reporters discovered that the FCC’s public comment process was being corrupted by the submission of enormous numbers of fake comments concerning the possible repeal of net neutrality rules. In doing so, the perpetrator or perpetrators attacked what is supposed to be an open public process by attempting to drown out and negate the views of the real people, businesses, and others who honestly commented on this important issue. Worse, while some of these fake comments used made up names and addresses, many misused the real names and addresses of actual people as part of the effort to undermine the integrity of the comment process. That’s akin to identity theft, and it happened on a massive scale.

An Open Letter to the FCC:

This should be an issue to bring Libs and Cons together.

Who sides with Comcast?

The met neutrality is favored by both parties. the Republicans are in favor because of the small businesses that pops up that can bring new jobs. The idea is that the ISPs can't charge these sites for special speeds to access these sites. ISPs already are able to slow you down by making false claims that you streamed an illegal movie which the people did not.

(11-21-2017 09:35 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 05:28 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 05:19 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 04:00 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The internet is a utility.

It should be treated like one.

Utilities usually don't have any competition.

Do ISPs have any real competition? Not In my area for sure.

I have three choices here

I have one choice where I live, TWC/Spectrum. The only other option is not an option, ATT/DSL which runs at 5 Mbps. I use the internet for banking, work, entertainment, social media, most everything. ISP is a monopoly for many people. I don't want to be sold an internet speed and then find out the sites I want to use are speed restricted or blocked. Just like I wouldn't want to buy a book from store A but FedEx tells me they refuse to deliver it, but if I buy from store B they will hold it for a week and then deliver or I can use store C and get it in 2 days (because store C pays FedEx a kickback). I'm paying for the delivery, why should the carrier try to tell me where to shop?

What gripes me the most is it's a push to force people back into cable TV or pay a premium to use the internet without cable. For example, I use Hulu to watch 14 sports channels for $40/mo and pay $60/mo. for internet. If Hulu is restricted I can always go back to good old TWC/Spectrum and get the same channels in their $130/mo. package that goes up $70/mo. after one year. Cable/internet companies use public right of ways to provide service just like telephone, gas, electric, sewer and water, and should be held to the same standards. Any moron with 2 brain cells can see that this is an attempt to monopolize the internet for the big players by restricting access for the little guys and startups.

Here is what an FCC commissioner had to say:

Net neutrality is the right to go where you want and do what you want on the internet without your broadband provider getting in the way. It means your broadband provider can’t block websites, throttle services or charge you premiums if you want to reach certain online content.
Proponents of wiping out these rules think that by allowing broadband providers more control and the ability to charge for premium access, it will spur investment. This is a dubious proposition.
Wiping out net neutrality would have big consequences. Without it, your broadband provider could carve internet access into fast and slow lanes, favoring the traffic of online platforms that have made special payments and consigning all others to a bumpy road. Your provider would have the power to choose which voices online to amplify and which to censor. The move could affect everything online, including the connections we make and the communities we create.
Op-Ed I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

This isn't China or North Korea
DON'T SCREW UP THE INTERNET

(11-22-2017 01:22 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  This should be an issue to bring Libs and Cons together.

Who sides with Comcast?

A depressing amount of people here, apparently.

(11-21-2017 10:11 PM)Claw Wrote:  We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

Thank you, well said.

(11-23-2017 12:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 10:11 PM)Claw Wrote:  We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

Thank you, well said.

No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 10:11 PM)Claw Wrote:  We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

Thank you, well said.

No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

you just came a whole lot of the same rhetoric......you fit right in with the dems.....

what you're smart enough to know is that censoring is your last across the bow be-al-gore is sunk....

we're just sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn with floss.....

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 10:11 PM)Claw Wrote:  We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

Thank you, well said.

No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

Nothing makes me more happy that seeing a far leftist mad as hell on Thanksgiving. Name calling, being nasty and rude today is exactly what I expect from you.

(11-23-2017 01:20 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 10:11 PM)Claw Wrote:  We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

Thank you, well said.

No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

Nothing makes me more happy that seeing a far leftist mad as hell on Thanksgiving. Name calling, being nasty and rude today is exactly what I expect from you.

like ol' tommy, he only wishes for the bone.....

it's pathetic what the left has become............................yet, was easily predictable....

(11-23-2017 01:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 10:11 PM)Claw Wrote:  We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

Thank you, well said.

No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

you just came a whole lot of the same rhetoric......you fit right in with the dems.....

what you're smart enough to know is that censoring is your last across the bow be-al-gore is sunk....

we're just sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn with floss.....

Stink, read the posts before you comment on them, then maybe you'll grasp why I don't need to provide quantitative evidence or source data to criticise someone affirmatively making a claim without either providing either of those.

(11-23-2017 01:20 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 10:11 PM)Claw Wrote:  We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

Thank you, well said.

No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

Nothing makes me more happy that seeing a far leftist mad as hell on Thanksgiving. Name calling, being nasty and rude today is exactly what I expect from you.

I said someone who would find an argument completely devoid of data or evidence compelling a simpleton. If that bothers you, that's on you to hold yourself to a higher standard.

(11-23-2017 01:38 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 10:11 PM)Claw Wrote:  We've already seen this.

We had 50 years of zero innovation under the AT&T phone monopoly. Within years of that breakup we went from 300 baud modems and fax machines to high speed modems and on to the Internet.

If you make the Internet a utility, it stops right where it is. It will never get any better. Ask the people in Michigan how good their water utility services are.

We are no where near the point where freezing the technologies used to deliver net services is a good idea.

Let the market work. All you guys that are worried about having your speed tampered with just buy from people who don't do that. That's how free markets work.

Thank you, well said.

No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

you just came a whole lot of the same rhetoric......you fit right in with the dems.....

what you're smart enough to know is that censoring is your last across the bow be-al-gore is sunk....

we're just sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn with floss.....

Stink, read the posts before you comment on them, then maybe you'll grasp why I don't need to provide quantitative evidence or source data to criticise someone affirmatively making a claim without either providing either of those.

you know what.....I'll concede that one (I read 'em all....it makes me laugh)

however, why come with gibberish when you have the potential to make light of .....or am I overstating what I see in ability???

I know you're no dummy.....you simply display the symptoms of another troll....that's a waste of ability IMO....

(11-23-2017 01:48 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:38 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Thank you, well said.

No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

you just came a whole lot of the same rhetoric......you fit right in with the dems.....

what you're smart enough to know is that censoring is your last across the bow be-al-gore is sunk....

we're just sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn with floss.....

Stink, read the posts before you comment on them, then maybe you'll grasp why I don't need to provide quantitative evidence or source data to criticise someone affirmatively making a claim without either providing either of those.

you know what.....I'll concede that one (I read 'em all....it makes me laugh)

however, why come with gibberish when you have the potential to make light of .....or am I overstating what I see in ability???

I know you're no dummy.....you simply display the symptoms of another troll....that's a waste of ability IMO....

Truth is I'm not really in a position to easily provide evidence contrary to his claim right now being on my phone, but I still wanted to outline how ridiculous it is for a statement like that to be considered compelling.