This seems like a last gasp attempt to tighten the monopoly, and it's doomed to fail. If nothing else, this will set the wheels in motion to bypass the established ISPs altogether, whether it's via node distribution or banking on Musk's satellite network. Or holding out hope that Google will pick up their fiber business again. Whatever happens, it's going to be interesting.
F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
821–830 of 1001 posts
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#822This has been asked a few times but never fully answered, can someone explain why this vote in particular is a problem? I understand net neutrality and I am all for it, but there was considerable public doubt before reclassification that this was the proper way to go about it. It also doesn't seem like the internet regulatory state of pre-2015 was a disaster. Would we better off focusing our efforts on increasing com…
There were net neutrality regulations before 2015! The idea that neutrality is this novel thing invented during the Obama administration is as toxic as it is ridiculously false.
Pre-2015, the FCC still had regulations to enforce net neutrality, just different ones. It was active in punishing ISPs for violating neutrality under those provisions. Verizon managed to get a court to say that those regulations were inappropriate, but the court also pointed out that if ISPs were regulated under Title II, then the FCC would have the power to set the regulations that had been de facto in place for the past decade. The FCC under Tom Wheeler immediately did just that.
The problem with this vote is that it removes all protections without replacing them with anything else. All we have now is "yeah, the FTC might look at it if it's egregious... also the ISPs promise really hard to behave themselves." It's not just that the FCC has removed the rules (although that's still incredibly important), it's that they've totally abdicated their position as the regulatory body for telecommunications.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#823This wouldn't be a problem if ISP's weren't de facto monopolies. If there was competition in this space, then there would be incentive to improve the infrastructure and Internet speeds. However, ISP's kill competition by making legal arrangements with local governments to only do business with them, and by cutting competitors' cables. Since we have no way to guarantee reasonable speeds to small time websites now, we…
I've been thinking this over for the past couple months, because I was pretty sure this would be the outcome - that we would lose our net neutrality protection. So let's play out the worse case - Comcast, AT&T etc wait out the shitstorm and then start throttling traffic and packaging the internet, releasing cable-esque "plans." Is it feasible to just start running our own fiber to hubs? I want to learn more about the…
> As a private citizen, can I ... just lay a super long fiber cable straight to it?
The other responses offer far more technical details than I can, and probably also a better long-term strategy, but here's a small thing you can do right now: knock on your neighbor's door, and offer a six-pack of good beer and half his internet bill in exchange for his WiFi password. If he says yes, cancel your service. Say you are moving to Bhutan and becoming a monk to make their "customer retention specialists" go away.
From my apartment in a fairly spread-out "city," I can see about ten wireless networks, half with a pretty good signal. I can only imagine what things are like in SF/NY, where techies are stacked on top of each other like dogs in a no-kill shelter.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#824India now becomes the largest consumer internet market in the world with net neutrality enforced - without China and the US in play.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#825Can someone explain the rebuttal to/flaws in this article? I'm sure the EFF and many other large organizations wouldn't back NN if it weren't truly a good idea, but then again this article also seems to make some good points.
http://hustlebear.com/2011/01/05/why-net-neutrality-regulati...
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#826Earlier quoted context omitted.
So an open-access network ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network ). This is done quite successfully in other countries around the world, like New Zealand where we mainly have one infrastructure provider (selected and monitored by the Government), who must offer fair and standard pricing to any ISP who wants to add value to the network. As a result, we have many ISP options throughout the country and comp…
What value do the ISPs actually add to the market? It seems like a government granted middleman position to me, where I'd rather just purchase service from the government or the government's selected infrastructure manager. Presumably there's already some base price for service that this infrastructure provider is charging everyone (a controller monopolist), what are you gaining on top of that by having a second midd…
The most immediate one to come to mind is that a private ISP can't indict me.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#827This wouldn't be a problem if ISP's weren't de facto monopolies. If there was competition in this space, then there would be incentive to improve the infrastructure and Internet speeds. However, ISP's kill competition by making legal arrangements with local governments to only do business with them, and by cutting competitors' cables. Since we have no way to guarantee reasonable speeds to small time websites now, we…
I've been thinking this over for the past couple months, because I was pretty sure this would be the outcome - that we would lose our net neutrality protection. So let's play out the worse case - Comcast, AT&T etc wait out the shitstorm and then start throttling traffic and packaging the internet, releasing cable-esque "plans." Is it feasible to just start running our own fiber to hubs? I want to learn more about the…
The more likely next step is not cable-esque plans. It is ISPs shaking down Internet companies to try to get huge sums of money at the source.
As such, what you'll see as a consumer is just higher prices from _other_ companies, as they're forced to pay for access to bandwidth which you paid for.
This also means that most people won't understand the problem, and won't get upset with the correct people.
This is a travesty, akin to if every appliance manufacturer had to pay a recurring tribute to the electric company.
But hey... at least the Libertarians are all quite excited.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#828Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been thinking this over for the past couple months, because I was pretty sure this would be the outcome - that we would lose our net neutrality protection. So let's play out the worse case - Comcast, AT&T etc wait out the shitstorm and then start throttling traffic and packaging the internet, releasing cable-esque "plans." Is it feasible to just start running our own fiber to hubs? I want to learn more about the…
Back when the last mile was a real problem, people got pretty inventive with using directional antennas to establish links over vast distances using unlicensed spectrum, which as far as I know is totally legal still. Here's a Cringely blog from 2001-ish: https://web.archive.org/web/20011215000823/http://www.pbs.or...
I did this for a few years in the late 90's, before anything better than POTS was available in my area. Used a 2.4 GHz 24 dBi antenna on my roof to reach an access point on a mountain about 7 miles away. This worked well; the network operators were competent and the service was more reliable than some of the systems I've had since.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#829why everyone thinks ISP will start to sell internet as tiered tv channels? this is not happening and will not happen.
what will, and is happening for the last 3 decades, is that ISP charge to do something they used to beg for: co location of high traffic services.
contente providers, lets pick netflix as an example, uses ton of bandwidth. but they already paid for their uplink. now, customers pay for the downlink. and ISP now see their oversold pipes actually being used (what a surprise). so they beg netflix to pretty please place some edge servers on their data centers so they dont pay the expensive outbound traffic. and netflix gladly did that because that cut latency from 300ms to 2ms for those customers. everyone happy.
then ISPs started to sell that as a feature for the reduced latency. but if nobody bougth, they would still fall back to begging for them to do that for free. and everyone still happy.
now they can outrigth limit how much expensive outbound bandwidth they will spend on netflix content. no matter that the ISP own customers already paid for bandwidth for that service or another. so netflix and all other providers will have to pay a huge premium for colocation (for that great latency reduction feature) or a still high premium simply to not be blocked!
the client will just see that they can't connect to netflix. the isp doesnt even have to warn their own users, because there is nothing they can do. netflix is the one who have to pay up. so they will have to charge more and pass that to ISPs. and that is the ISP end game. they can still be afloat after cable cutters moved to streaming platforms they dont own and operate (which is the likely outcome, since all their attempts are falling flat on their faces)
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#830Can someone explain the rebuttal to/flaws in this article? I'm sure the EFF and many other large organizations wouldn't back NN if it weren't truly a good idea, but then again this article also seems to make some good points. http://hustlebear.com/2011/01/05/why-net-neutrality-regulati...
Interesting read with some interesting points, some make some sense, and I'm all for a fresh look. The article lost me on this quote:
"What we need to understand is that while ISPs aren’t currently regulated by the government, they are already severely regulated. Not by government. They are regulated by YOU. You are their customer. You are the boss. You hold the checkbook. ISP companies are regulated by profits. That’s right, profit is the regulator. Like every company that is in business for profit, they have to answer to their customers. All successful businesses are constantly sniffing; trying to figure out what customers want. Profit makes them care about you. Customers will only voluntarily hand over money if it’s worth it. Right now we have de-facto Net Neutrality, because that’s what you want. That’s what we all want."
This is the same worn-out saying around "the invisible hand" and "competition will force ISPs to keep net neutrality"
Well, it's not like they never tried... there rules are there for a reason.
I mean, maybe it will work, but if all ISPs start offering "internet fast lanes" and "social package" (and it's not like companies didn't collude before) then the invisible hand will be infeasible.