9 year old "Juice Rap News" video expressing the importance of net neutrality, it's a banger:
FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
21–30 of 302 posts
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is that remotely the same thing? The infographic above and others clearly claim that ISPs will be blocking services then requiring you to pay for them separately. Exempting services from data caps is not against net neutrality, and for example has been regular practice all across Europe (which has "net neutrality"). Isn't it just shifting the goal posts after the original claims of NN campaigners were discredited…
> Exempting services from data caps is not against net neutrality, and for example has been regular practice all across Europe (which has "net neutrality"). UPS doesn't care if it is a Nike shirt or a Gucci shirt in a box, They just deliver the box where it is meant to go. Why should it be any different for an ISP?
UPS certainly does care, a Gucci shirt is going to have more insurance, maybe require a signature.
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#23One of the biggest arguments I remember being made back when net neutrality was a hot topic was that ISPs would bundle and sell specific websites as tiered plans. Infographics like this one [1] were shared widely. Has this happened in the US? I’ve definitely seen ISPs start to apply data caps and throttling, but haven’t seen the aforementioned packaging (at least with the major ISPs). I ask because this is one of the…
The sky was supposed to fall if net neutrality were abrogated, and IME, that hasn't happened. The only change I (and people I know) witnessed was throttling once broad data limits were exceeded, which IIRC wasn't what was at stake, and which I for one didn't object to, i.e., that people would have to pay for what they use. In short, I have not seen bandwidth or pricing weaponized at all to target specific businesses…
The sky was supposed to fall if net neutrality were abrogated, and IME, that hasn't happened.
ISPs aren't run by complete idiots. They knew this current switch back was a likely possibility. If they had rushed to implement service tiers, it would have given even more ammunition to the net neutrality debate.
Now they can say "See we had a chance for a few years to do it and didn't, so we need to pass laws to make sure net neutrality is illegal to protect our freedom." They'll pay some politicians to push something like the "Internet Freedom Act" and then they'll be good to go.
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have gotten it, but with services not websites. Mobile providers will sell you an "Unlimited" data plan that throttles everything after 25GB a month. Streaming Spotify and Apple Music won't count against that soft data cap. Streaming other music services will count against it. Video streaming over YouTube, Netflix, etc is capped at 480p levels. If you pay an additional monthly fee, you get upgraded to "Unlimited P…
How is that remotely the same thing? The infographic above and others clearly claim that ISPs will be blocking services then requiring you to pay for them separately. Exempting services from data caps is not against net neutrality, and for example has been regular practice all across Europe (which has "net neutrality"). Isn't it just shifting the goal posts after the original claims of NN campaigners were discredited…
> Exempting services from data caps is not against net neutrality,
It certainly sounds exactly as if it is. It is preferring one service's data over another.
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#25One of the biggest arguments I remember being made back when net neutrality was a hot topic was that ISPs would bundle and sell specific websites as tiered plans. Infographics like this one [1] were shared widely. Has this happened in the US? I’ve definitely seen ISPs start to apply data caps and throttling, but haven’t seen the aforementioned packaging (at least with the major ISPs). I ask because this is one of the…
If net neutrality is not relevant anyways, why are ISPs so dead set against it?
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#26[flagged]
HE was refusing to provide internet connectivity to Kiwi Farms's host, that's a different thing than net neutrality. They're not interfering with traffic even though the EFF puts it that way, they're dropping a customer.
A "neutral" ISP can't refuse to get that host's packets if they transit through their network (including delivering the packets to the ISP's end users), but they can absolutely refuse to do business with anyone, including Kiwi Farms or Kiwi Farms's host or Kiwi Farms's host's host.
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#27One of the biggest arguments I remember being made back when net neutrality was a hot topic was that ISPs would bundle and sell specific websites as tiered plans. Infographics like this one [1] were shared widely. Has this happened in the US? I’ve definitely seen ISPs start to apply data caps and throttling, but haven’t seen the aforementioned packaging (at least with the major ISPs). I ask because this is one of the…
The sky was supposed to fall if net neutrality were abrogated, and IME, that hasn't happened. The only change I (and people I know) witnessed was throttling once broad data limits were exceeded, which IIRC wasn't what was at stake, and which I for one didn't object to, i.e., that people would have to pay for what they use. In short, I have not seen bandwidth or pricing weaponized at all to target specific businesses…
There are 2 'net neutrality' items in play and are conflated and team lines drawn up ages ago.
One is the double charging of services. Buy service XYZ on the internet then the ISP says 'hey you buy or special package or ABC is throttled'. That is the one most people think of when they hear net neutrality. Or 'we have not cut a deal with XYZ no data for you'.
Then there is the 'stop the cap' ones. Where 'hey here is a nice unlimited service except when you use more than X data then its not'. 'want more data pay for more on top of your "unlimited" plan'.
Then instead of passing laws to do it right they pretzelled the existing laws. Made some up and said yep thats good. Each "side" of the argument has had control of both houses and the presidential. Yet none of them got it done. Instead we are going to end up with more rubish and no real laws. Just made up interpretations that can change on a whim.
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Exempting services from data caps is not against net neutrality, and for example has been regular practice all across Europe (which has "net neutrality"). UPS doesn't care if it is a Nike shirt or a Gucci shirt in a box, They just deliver the box where it is meant to go. Why should it be any different for an ISP?
UPS certainly does care, a Gucci shirt is going to have more insurance, maybe require a signature.
Which is a specialty service offering set up and agreed upon by buyer and seller of the service using the dumb pipe.
So, opt-in versus required. Net neutrality certainly allows special pipes and protocols to be set up where desired, if you desire to stretch the analogy beyond its intent.
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#29Do we need net neutrality ? I didn't even know it was gone. My internet is the same as ever
Same.
Re: FCC aims to reinstate net neutrality after us Democrats gain control of panel
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have gotten it, but with services not websites. Mobile providers will sell you an "Unlimited" data plan that throttles everything after 25GB a month. Streaming Spotify and Apple Music won't count against that soft data cap. Streaming other music services will count against it. Video streaming over YouTube, Netflix, etc is capped at 480p levels. If you pay an additional monthly fee, you get upgraded to "Unlimited P…
How is that remotely the same thing? The infographic above and others clearly claim that ISPs will be blocking services then requiring you to pay for them separately. Exempting services from data caps is not against net neutrality, and for example has been regular practice all across Europe (which has "net neutrality"). Isn't it just shifting the goal posts after the original claims of NN campaigners were discredited…
> Exempting services from data caps is not against net neutrality
What, in your perspective, is the difference between "I'll charge you more for A than for B" and "I'll charge you less for B than A"? Or a difference between "Charging more for a 'website' such as Yahoo" vs "Charging less for a 'service' such as Netflix"?
-----
Further, all the utility analogies you provide feel inapplicable to the point of being disingenuous. The "Heavy users pay" is "I need a bigger pipe" and is the segregation of internet service tiers by bandwidth ($10 for 100mbps, $100 for 1gps, or whatever). The "I will then, on top of that, charge you extra for arbitrary content that I don't produce, and you will have no choice as I have an effective government approved monopoly", has limited parallel that I'm aware of.
A person using more electricity will pay more. A person needing more bandwidth will pay more. Those are valid analogies in my mind. Other shenanigans such as IPSs blocking certain websites, injecting ads or weird stuff into your pages, asking more money for certain websites (or less money for other, which is equivalent), imposing their own DNS, spying on you, etc, are fairly unique to this industry I think.