41–50 of 452 posts
Trumps appointees disappoint me a lot. This guy and the one over the EPA
The FCC only has 3 people on it right now (2 R, 1 D), with 2 vacant seats.
Net Neutrality is a meme started by Google (the Halliburton of advertising) as propaganda intended to help harm its competitors. Why shouldn't a local ISP make a deal with Bing Video to stream 5K unlimited in exchange for interruption ads, while limiting youtube traffic to 1080p? Why should Google strong-arm those ISPs (via net neutrality) into providing support for the most expensive leg of data transit between cust…
How much of this can just be fixed by the free market? If I feel an ISP is limiting my choices wouldn't I just switch?
How many ISPs do you have to choose from? Personally, I have two: Comcast and AT&T. Comcast has been a nightmare recently, with almost weekly outages and frequent periods of severely degraded bandwidth. AT&T (even their supposed "Fiber" offering) requires a working copper twisted-pair RJ11 outlet where the gateway is to be installed, which I don't have and which would require an electrician and multiple holes in my w…
Evidently there would be less trolling.
Anyway, you're making the "free market" point--local governments are restricting the market, leaving you with fewer choices.
Net Neutrality is a meme started by Google (the Halliburton of advertising) as propaganda intended to help harm its competitors. Why shouldn't a local ISP make a deal with Bing Video to stream 5K unlimited in exchange for interruption ads, while limiting youtube traffic to 1080p? Why should Google strong-arm those ISPs (via net neutrality) into providing support for the most expensive leg of data transit between cust…
In a data pipeline, that is not the case.
Most real world analogies for the internet are contrived and do more harm than good. We need to understand this technology is unlike anything we have had before, and its closest cousin is communications. And we have already qualified our communications pipelines as neutral infrastructure.
Please give your position on this matter more thought, without the harmful highway analogy.
Trumps appointees disappoint me a lot. This guy and the one over the EPA
Ajit Pai was technically appointed to the FCC by Obama. (Though this panel of 5 people can have only at-most 3 people of the same part affiliation on it at any given time). What Trump did was appoint Ajit the chairman of the FCC. The FCC only has 3 people on it right now (2 R, 1 D), with 2 vacant seats.
Does anyone else find the internet market odd? Up until now net neutrality and other policies have given us the following: 1. Massive monopolies which essentially control 95% of all tech (google, facebook, amazon, microsoft, apple, etc) 2. An internet where every consumer assumes everything should be free. 3. An internet where there's only enough room for a handfull of players in each market globally i.e. if you have…
By giving them the power to selectively control what they're sending down the pipe, the monopoly problem will grow far far worse.
Net neutrality is not the cause of the problems you listed, and removing it won't solve any of them.
If you want people to take your article seriously, then maybe you shouldn't put a pointless animated GIF in it.
The HTML of the page doesn't contain "888". This makes it impossible for some disabled people to get the number at all. This makes it a practical concern in addition to bad taste.
(For the record, while I generally dislike gifs, I don't have strong feelings, either way, regarding the animated image here.)
Net Neutrality is a meme started by Google (the Halliburton of advertising) as propaganda intended to help harm its competitors. Why shouldn't a local ISP make a deal with Bing Video to stream 5K unlimited in exchange for interruption ads, while limiting youtube traffic to 1080p? Why should Google strong-arm those ISPs (via net neutrality) into providing support for the most expensive leg of data transit between cust…
Because I pay my ISP to serve the content I want, not the content they want.
This is FUD. Any ISP that decided to break the internet is going to fail. All they'd do is offer other services as alternatives to the big dollar ones like YouTube.
A last mile ISP does two core things. It arbitrages bandwidth for residential usage patterns and it deals with the last mile communications link. Net Neutrality forces a very specific arbitrage strategy on ISPs that severely limits profitability and removes the incentive for last-mile innovation.
I wasn't impressed with this article; it reads like fear mongering. More importantly, I don't think the fix is regulation, I think it's better privacy tech + increased competition via elimination of local monopolies. Do we really want to depend on government to enforce privacy on the Internet?
Does anyone else find the internet market odd? Up until now net neutrality and other policies have given us the following: 1. Massive monopolies which essentially control 95% of all tech (google, facebook, amazon, microsoft, apple, etc) 2. An internet where every consumer assumes everything should be free. 3. An internet where there's only enough room for a handfull of players in each market globally i.e. if you have…