The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes

Post by LordKeren » Sat, Apr 13, 2024, 5:29 PM UTC

cycomanic wrote: post #69

burnte wrote: post #4

ISPs are desperate to be part of the monetary exchange of services over their infrastructure, they've been trying to become more than "dumb pipes" for decades and virtually no one wants that. Imagine if the water company could charge you more for a glass of water than a toilet flush.

I find it interesting how nobody blinks an eyelid at the massive profits raked in by companies like Google, Facebook etc. but as soon as the ISPs that create the infrastructure that makes all this happen (and innovate massively in the process) want some piece of the cake everyone cries foul. Now I actually strongly support net neutrality and maybe ISPs don't really need a piece of the cake, but it is still interestin…

Post by gruez » Sat, Apr 13, 2024, 5:34 PM UTC

ricardobeat wrote: post #68

EPWN3D wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was definitely someone who wrote the FCC (futilely) in support of net neutrality in 2017, and I figured the inevitable outcome of the FCC decision back then would be skyrocketing broadband costs, fast lanes, etc. Except none of it happened. It turns out there's actually kind of okay competition in this space. Maybe not as much as there should be, but prices have stayed reasonable, broadband access is expanding, and…

That's because the internet went to shit and actually very little happens outside of major platforms anyway. This type of traffic shaping would just cement it as-is, making it almost impossible for a new platform to come up.

Post by passwordoops » Sat, Apr 13, 2024, 5:35 PM UTC

KaiserPro wrote: post #2

The thing that is actually missing from this entire essay is competition. The biggest single reason why the USA's (and to a lesser extent Canada's) internet is shite is because of the monopolies that exist. In the EU there are similar offers for "enhanced" access, but its not speeding up/slowing down apps, but giving "free" access, as in not counting to your data cap. Instead of making the FCC stop fast lanes, the FC…

Post by seabird » Sat, Apr 13, 2024, 5:36 PM UTC

beeboobaa3 wrote: post #90

EPWN3D wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was definitely someone who wrote the FCC (futilely) in support of net neutrality in 2017, and I figured the inevitable outcome of the FCC decision back then would be skyrocketing broadband costs, fast lanes, etc. Except none of it happened. It turns out there's actually kind of okay competition in this space. Maybe not as much as there should be, but prices have stayed reasonable, broadband access is expanding, and…

> It turns out there's actually kind of okay competition in this space. Maybe not as much as there should be, but prices have stayed reasonable, broadband access is expanding, and people by and large don't seem bothered by data caps when they're subject to them lol. This is better attributed to you getting used to the shitty situation you, and everyone else in your country, is dealing with. Your speeds are shit and y…

Post by rsanek » Sat, Apr 13, 2024, 5:36 PM UTC

otterley wrote: post #81

cycomanic wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting how nobody blinks an eyelid at the massive profits raked in by companies like Google, Facebook etc. but as soon as the ISPs that create the infrastructure that makes all this happen (and innovate massively in the process) want some piece of the cake everyone cries foul. Now I actually strongly support net neutrality and maybe ISPs don't really need a piece of the cake, but it is still interestin…

There’s a reason for that. Neither Google nor Facebook are infrastructure providers. Infrastructure is a different business, and, since it frequently has natural monopolies, we regulate it so to provide the greatest good for the public and maximize stability and functionality. Infrastructure is an enabling foundation for competitive enterprise.