FCC: Votes to Repeal Net Neutrality

[TheDarkKnight]

A couple of emotional articles from Vice aren't really providing rational examples of how ISPs acted differently prior to 2015.

Okay then flip it. Where are all the problems that net neutrality caused? Because as far as I know, there have been none.

Where was all the innovation that happened before that was stifled by the 2015 changes?

Evidence has been provided by the pro nn side so I'm sure there is plenty of contrary evidence by the anti nn side.

[Heathen Hammer]

Okay then flip it. Where are all the problems that net neutrality caused? Because as far as I know, there have been none.

Where was all the innovation that happened before that was stifled by the 2015 changes?

Evidence has been provided by the pro nn side so I'm sure there is plenty of contrary evidence by the anti nn side.

It wasn't supposed to. Basically its one of those laws that nobody wouldn't break out of PR damage it would cause and passed only to make current administration look good.

[The spartan]

A couple of emotional articles from Vice aren't really providing rational examples of how ISPs acted differently prior to 2015.

We had net neutrality before 2015. The laws pertaining to it were different, but it was still net neutrality (ISPs can't control bandwidth usage).

[the_mango55]

It wasn't supposed to. Basically its one of those laws that nobody wouldn't break out of PR damage it would cause and passed only to make current administration look good.

Like we have repeatedly asked, if they wouldn't break those laws anyway, why did they spend so much money to repeal them?

[NorseThing]

Judging by the recent news cycles the appears to be only crickets regarding actual consequences. I am thinking that maybe a wait and see attitude may be more appropriate than panic.

[Infidel144]

Like we have repeatedly asked, if they wouldn't break those laws anyway, why did they spend so much money to repeal them?

How much money did they spend to get the FCC to 'repeal' the regulations?

[Sir Adrian]

This year? About 30 million dollars each quarter, so 120 million dollars in total. Last year they spent 88 million, the year before ~100. That's money used to lobby the fcc directly. Add to that all the media campaigns and payed shills and the total more than doubles.

That's a lot of money for some rules which "don't do anything" and they "don't intend to break anyway"

http://fortune.com/2016/06/13/cable-...-lobbying-fcc/

[Chukada1]

Among Western Democracies, only America would vote to repeal net neutrality.

[Infidel144]

This year? About 30 million dollars each quarter, so 120 million dollars in total. Last year they spent 88 million, the year before ~100. That's money used to lobby the fcc directly. Add to that all the media campaigns and payed shills and the total more than doubles.

That's a lot of money for some rules which "don't do anything" and they "don't intend to break anyway"

http://fortune.com/2016/06/13/cable-...-lobbying-fcc/

I may have missed it but I did not see anything in the article about 'net neutrality'.

[Sir Adrian]

They're lobbying the FCC directly to prevent/repeal unfavorable regulations. That includes net neutrality by default.

[Elfdude]

This thread provides the starkest example of who the few "reasonable" conservatives on this forum are.

[NorseThing]

I guess that I am in the unreasonable conservative category then. Okay.

But then where are these guys on the left being reasonable?:

But on Dec. 14, 2017, the FCC voted along party lines to pass Chairman Pai’s plan to dismantle the Net Neutrality rules.
Without these rules, companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon will be able to block or slow down any online content — including political speech they disagree with. This will disproportionately harm people of color and other marginalized communities who use the internet to fight systemic discrimination and share their stories.
Net Neutrality is essential to education, economic opportunity, innovation, social movements and dissent. Without Net Neutrality there’s no way to organize for justice or power the resistance.

https://www.savetheinternet.com/sti-home

But then, I have already been classified as unreasonable so...

[Sir Adrian]

That's just the regular leeches trying to catch some screen time. If this passes congress it will be bad for everybody, regardless of color and gender and occupation. Worse it will have ripples outside the US, and quite frankly we're sick and tired of having to foot the bill every time America's leadership does something retarded (which is starting to be quite often).


EDIT: Let me give you an example of how this affects you personally.

You like TWC, right? Of course you do. You wouldn't be here if you didn't. If this passes your ISP, whoever it is, will be able to charge you as many dfollars per month as it wants just so you can visit TWC. Worse, Jason (the owner, aka GED) will be forced to pay premiums to every ISP in the states to keep the site in their listing (if you are on Comcast, they already did this with Netflix - which is why it's 10 dollars more expensive than 3 years ago and the quality is worse)

Considering that a large chunk of this site's userbase is american TWC will close down within a few months to a year and you will get to talk politics on the comcast/time-warner/aol forum instead. Enjoy.

[Gaidin]

You like TWC, right? Of course you do. You wouldn't be here if you didn't. If this passes your ISP, whoever it is, will be able to charge you as many dfollars per month as it wants just so you can visit TWC. Worse, Jason (the owner, aka GED) will be forced to pay premiums to every ISP in the states to keep the site in their listing (if you are on Comcast, they already did this with Netflix - which is why it's 10 dollars more expensive than 3 years ago and the quality is worse)

Considering that a large chunk of this site's userbase is american TWC will close down within a few months to a year and you will get to talk politics on the comcast/time-warner/aol forum instead. Enjoy.

Your imagination is pretty narrow from a business standpoint.

First. TWC as a content host hilariously hideously small. Messing with TWC is like a billionaire stopping work to spend time picking up a penny. They lose money. What will functionally cause problems if they don't actually upgrade the networks(which they won't) is sites like Netflix and Youtube.

Second. There's a three step process that providers like Comcast and Verizon will follow.

Step 1. Absolutely nothing.

The first thing the ISPs are going to do is nothing. Not a goddamn thing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. They will sit back and enjoy the show.

They're not going to go shake down Netflix, Youtube, iTunes, Steam, or any other high bandwith generator. They won't theaten to throttle anyone, they won't throttle anyone, nor do anything else like that.

On the other hand, technology like 4k video just came out on a mass market scale. So other people are going to be doing things. Especially Netflix, Youtube, iTunes, Steam, or other mass bandwidth generators. (Hint: not TWCenter) They are going to be generating more bandwidth with 4k videos etc.

Step 1, to put it simply, is that the ISPs are doing nothing, while the rest of the internet gets deeper and wider, forcing everyone else to compete for the same absolute amount of bandwidth on the ISPs backends until it gets saturated and everything slows down.

Step 2 is to offer paid prioritization, meaning that anyone who pays for it can get their traffic as fast as possible. Just like if the ISP had continued to upgrade their own network(which they haven't and won't), while simultaneously degrading everyone else's internet including the paid prioritization client's competitors.

The last step is of course "profit" as it always is in America for large well established (read: has a PAC and lobbyists) corporations.

[Infidel144]

They're lobbying the FCC directly to prevent/repeal unfavorable regulations. That includes net neutrality by default.

So in fact, not an answer to my question which was about assertions that large amounts of money have been spent lobbying the FCC to change the net neutrality rules. The answer would actually be, "I don't know".

(if you are on Comcast, they already did this with Netflix - which is why it's 10 dollars more expensive than 3 years ago and the quality is worse)

I don't get it. If net neutrality is intended to prevent this, then how did it happen with net neutrality in place?

[NorseThing]

Your imagination is pretty narrow from a business standpoint.

First. TWC as a content host hilariously hideously small. Messing with TWC is like a billionaire stopping work to spend time picking up a penny. They lose money. What will functionally cause problems if they don't actually upgrade the networks(which they won't) is sites like Netflix and Youtube.

Second. There's a three step process that providers like Comcast and Verizon will follow.

Step 1. Absolutely nothing.

The first thing the ISPs are going to do is nothing. Not a goddamn thing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. They will sit back and enjoy the show.

They're not going to go shake down Netflix, Youtube, iTunes, Steam, or any other high bandwith generator. They won't theaten to throttle anyone, they won't throttle anyone, nor do anything else like that.

On the other hand, technology like 4k video just came out on a mass market scale. So other people are going to be doing things. Especially Netflix, Youtube, iTunes, Steam, or other mass bandwidth generators. (Hint: not TWCenter) They are going to be generating more bandwidth with 4k videos etc.

Step 1, to put it simply, is that the ISPs are doing nothing, while the rest of the internet gets deeper and wider, forcing everyone else to compete for the same absolute amount of bandwidth on the ISPs backends until it gets saturated and everything slows down.

Step 2 is to offer paid prioritization, meaning that anyone who pays for it can get their traffic as fast as possible. Just like if the ISP had continued to upgrade their own network(which they haven't and won't), while simultaneously degrading everyone else's internet including the paid prioritization client's competitors.

The last step is of course "profit" as it always is in America for large well established (read: has a PAC and lobbyists) corporations.

I agree, but this is the reality with or without net neutrality. The providers of the out dated and in great need of expansion backbone understand the economic reality often referred to"The Tragedy of the Commons"(PDF).

[the_mango55]

So in fact, not an answer to my question which was about assertions that large amounts of money have been spent lobbying the FCC to change the net neutrality rules. The answer would actually be, "I don't know".

So unless someone provides you an exact dollar figure on how much cable and ISP companies have spent on net neutrality lobbying specifically, you don't believe they spent any? I can't tell what your argument is.

How much money has Soros spent on black lives matter protests?

This thread provides the starkest example of who the few "reasonable" conservatives on this forum are.

Conservatives on TWC

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Gaidin]

So in fact, not an answer to my question which was about assertions that large amounts of money have been spent lobbying the FCC to change the net neutrality rules. The answer would actually be, "I don't know".


I don't get it. If net neutrality is intended to prevent this, then how did it happen with net neutrality in place?

They were given public money to upgrade their networks but didn't anyway.

[Infidel144]

So unless someone provides you an exact dollar figure on how much cable and ISP companies have spent on net neutrality lobbying specifically, you don't believe they spent any? I can't tell what your argument is.

The claim is lobbying the FCC about net neutrality. I had not made an argument. I wanted to know, and I wanted to see if posters could actually back up their assertions. At this point, postyers claiming that can not.

How much money has Soros spent on black lives matter protests?

I said nothing about Soros, so your red herring is simply an idiotic attempt to distract from the subject.

They were given public money to upgrade their networks but didn't anyway.

What does that have to do with net neutrality (which did not prevent Comcast from raising the price for Netflix or something).

[Gaidin]

What does that have to do with net neutrality (which did not prevent Comcast from raising the price for Netflix or something).

This except you can't bring a case or complaint against them anymore.