information Am I The Only Techie Against Net Neutrality?

[Michael M]

I personally was recently upset to find that NamePros decided to take a political position in favor of Net Neutrality - which I firmly believe instates a regulatory system over the Internet that never should exist. It is sold as "Keeping the Internet Free" - but keep in mind something is much more free before it is regulated. Regulation by definition takes freedoms away from the citizens and businesses.

The position and main talking point is this regulation gives the Government the control to keep Comcast from throttling your Netflix - but it gives them much more power than that. Essentially FCC type control similar to TV networks. This could easily evolve into stifling innovation and freedom of speech.

After waking up this morning, I still found myself offended that NamePros takes this position against the interest of it's users. I found even more offense that my opposition to it seemed to fire up the admins to be more in favor of it and continue to show these deceiving messages more in the future. I refer you to the fact they told me they would put consideration before doing this again, and then short hours later said they had decided to continue. Maybe I am alone in thinking this, but that is ok.

I have yet to decide my future involvement in the NamePros community, but most certainly would feel better if they would not continue to present support in such a deceiving and intrusive manner which solicits people to sign a petition with the urgency that we will lose our freedom otherwise. This is unacceptable behavior for an Internet Company or forum about domaining IMO.

I wanted to share an article I had saved in the past because I found it important to my Industry's livelihood and future. It is amazing how close this is to how I feel today - as I stand in this forum alone.

If you watch the news, it seems just about everyone is in favor of “Net Neutrality” legislation. Despite being a tech-addicted entrepreneur, I am not. No, I am not a paid shill for the cable industry. I am no fan of Comcast or any other ISP I’ve ever had the "pleasure" of dealing with. I’m skeptical of large corporations generally and dislike the fact that in this debate I appear to be on their side. While I have no problem with net neutrality as a principle or concept, I have serious concerns about Net Neutrality as legislation or public policy. And since a false dichotomy is being perpetuated by the media in regards to this matter, I feel an obligation to put forth a third point of view. In taking this stand, I realize I may be the only techie, if I can aspire to that label, opposed to Net Neutrality and that I open myself to accusations of killing the dreams of young entrepreneurs, wrecking free speech, and destroying the Internet. Nevertheless, here are three reasons I’m against Net Neutrality legislation.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshst...y-techie-against-net-neutrality/#ef0ba5270d51

 

[NamePrime]

So you're saying that this is a twisted version of the definition of Net Neutrality?

• WHAT IS NET NEUTRALITY?
  Net neutrality is the basic principle that protects our free speech on the Internet. "Title II" of the Communications Act is what provides the legal foundation for net neutrality and prevents Internet Service Providers like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from slowing down and blocking websites, or charging apps and sites extra fees to reach an audience (which they then pass along to consumers.)
  
  
• WHY IS NET NEUTRALITY IMPORTANT?
  The Internet has thrived precisely because of net neutrality. It's what makes it so vibrant and innovative—a place for creativity, free expression, and exchange of ideas. Without net neutrality, the Internet will become more like Cable TV, where the content you see is what your provider puts in front of you.
  

 

[NamePrime]

Now I'm confused

 

[NamePrime]

In the popup "Cable companies want to get rid of net neutrality. Without it, sites like this one could be censored, slowed down, or forced to charge extra fees. We can stop them and keep the Internet open, fast, and awesome if we all contact Congress and the FCC, but we only have a few days left. "

 

[deez007]

neu·tral·i·ty

noun: neutrality

1. 1.
   the state of not supporting or helping either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc.; impartiality.
   "during the war, Switzerland maintained its neutrality"
2. 2.
   absence of decided views, expression, or strong feeling.
   "the clinical neutrality of the description"
3. 3.
   the condition of being chemically or electrically neutral.

 

[deez007]

We would have to go full political for me to give you some other examples of backwards named laws.

My initial reason for caring is I didn't want NPs in politics. I come here because it is about domains. But when I see someone pushing what I consider a misleading political position - or actually any political position - it is un-nerving. I personally am trying to tune politics out but this is one subject that is close to my heart because I have been on and developing for the internet virtually my entire life - and I believe regulation of the "Free" internet makes it less Free.

Don't get me wrong mate, I am 1000% behind an unregulated Internet. I'm sure that most people here on NP are all on the same wavelength when it comes to that. I also try to tune out of politics as much as possible so I understand where you are coming from. I also understand the amount of smoke and mirrors that exist by those wanting to control the masses, this includes BS laws and regulations that have been passed to protect corporations and certain industries whilst "scr*wing people over.

What I'm trying to understand here is that is this entire campaign for "FREE" internet a farse that has duped people into signing a petition under false pretences?

 

[Constantin S]

WTF are you talking about? from what I know NP was against Net Neutrality.

 

[Michael M]

WTF are you talking about? from what I know NP was against Net Neutrality.

No. They are 100% unanimously for it according to Paul. See the thread about the popup everyone was getting.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/battle-for-the-net-july-12-petition-popup.1029678

https://www.namepros.com/threads/internet-freedom-under-attack-says-godaddy.1029626

 

[Constantin S]

"We've joined hundreds of other big websites in dedicating July 12 to promoting freedom on the internet."
If you just took 1-2 minutes to read what the petition was about it would've been great.
NP supports free internet.

 

[Michael M]

That's exactly what I mean. The way everything reads you would think they are against it and trying to save the internet freedom. But they are actually for it and trying to keep it from being repealed. Read all the way through and you will see Paul defending it on the first link.

 

[Michael M]

Don't get me wrong mate, I am 1000% behind an unregulated Internet. I'm sure that most people here on NP are all on the same wavelength when it comes to that. I also try to tune out of politics as much as possible so I understand where you are coming from. I also understand the amount of smoke and mirrors that exist by those wanting to control the masses, this includes BS laws and regulations that have been passed to protect corporations and certain industries whilst "scr*wing people over.

What I'm trying to understand here is that is this entire campaign for "FREE" internet a farse that has duped people into signing a petition under false pretences?

That is my position. You would have to be interested enough in it to do your own research and come to your own conclusions.

But yea, to stop comcast from throttling netflix they passed close to 1000s pages of regulations for the internet. (if I remember correctly on the #) This current petition going around is about saving those regulations.

 

[deez007]

That is my position. You would have to be interested enough in it to do your own research and come to your own conclusions.

But yea, to stop comcast from throttling netflix they passed close to 1000s pages of regulations for the internet. (if I remember correctly on the #) This current petition going around is about saving those regulations.

This is something that I have not dug deeper into, mainly cos I assumed that it's ludicrous to think they would even get away with trying to regulate the Internet.... I made the assumption that they would be stopped and the relevant people with "block" this from happening... I also signed a few petitions thinking it was to keep the Internet neutral.... it has just dawned on me, the last time the US was doing something which I thought was ludicrious and that it would never happen bcos surely the collective intelligence there would not allow it to happen...was when Trump started running for President...I had a good laugh and thought to myself, what an idiot, like he actually has a chance in hell.

I guess this is something I'm going to have to dig deeper into....

 

[Michael M]

I see. But maybe regulation is now needed to save net neutrality? Or would you rather say that a simple prohibition of dividing the internet into bandwidth-classes as some big telecommunication corporations intend to do would be better/sufficient?

I mean: When these corporations intend to divide the internet into "bandwidth-classes" and to treat data traffic differently, what would you propose to do in order to prevent them from doing that?

The US - at least in the past - believed in the free market - which is what turned the internet into what it is.

There are issues with the Free Market system, but there is litigation, monopoly laws, and the nature of the beast that allow things to regulate themselves.

Recently in America there is a big political and social divide - so everything is partisan rather people realize it or not. We are progressing in Europe's direction as far as our government system goes. Pretty much the two parties are just about what speed we will arrive there. And I think most citizens are just sick of being lied to by the politicians on both sides.

I personally am disgusted with the state of our politics now and I try to stay away. But for me the Internet was the last "wild west" left from the US - and it was thriving. I fear our government will use these regulations in a manner which will stifle innovation and it will actually favor the big companies who have lobbyist in Washington DC. I just think this will all upset the balance and change the internet as we know it over the next 10-20 years - compared to the direction it would have gone. I believe only the big companies will win with this Legislation - even though it is presented as the opposite.

But that is my opinion. Everyone has their own.

I just believe that the current popups going around are really misleading - as this thread has shown. People were signing it that had no idea what it actually is about just because it said "SAVE YOUR INTERNET FREEDOM - SIGN HERE!"

And also I believe businesses should stay out of politics. I believe NPs motivations were probably good with their support - but I believe they are blinded by their views. I dont think they gain or loose from it. Hence why promote it unless you want to sway people to your point of view politically.

I think a lot of the other big companies that were supporting it seem to gain from it staying enforce or do so as a business calculation since it reads as showing support for the free internet.

 

[Michael M]

To add - The network cost of all this new video steaming data will be passed to the end user in one way or another. This was presented to save your bandwidth from throttling - but Comcast and Netflix would have worked out their disagreement in one manner or another and the end user would pay still pay for the increased network cost regardless.

You do have to consider that NetFlix was putting a major strain on a network that Comcast built - forcing Comcast to limit their bandwidth. Even if they choose to expand their network to handle the traffic (which they have and would have) they probably would have wanted to throttle it in the meantime so other internet users could check their email. Just a thought.

 

[deez007]

Good Ol John Oliver

 

[NamesBond]

I see. But maybe regulation is now needed to save net neutrality? Or would you rather say that a simple prohibition of dividing the internet into bandwidth-classes as some big telecommunication corporations intend to do would be better/sufficient?

I mean: When these corporations intend to divide the internet into "bandwidth-classes" and to treat data traffic differently, what would you propose to do in order to prevent them from doing that?

IMHO, what seems to be missing in this discussion is a self-interested "Domainers" perspective... If you allow the big Telecoms to throttle bandwidth, this creates barriers to entry for start-up online businesses... The very folks we sell domains to... (In short, our bread-and-butter... ) Now, I am not political and I generally favor less regulation and free markets, but in this instance, if they do away with Net Neutrality we are only cutting our own throats, domain-business-wise... again, JMHO...

 

[Eric Lyon]

This topic already exists. Here's the existing topic:

• https://www.namepros.com/threads/battle-for-the-net-july-12-petition-popup.1029678/

Thanks for understanding,

 

[NamePrime]

No. They are 100% unanimously for it according to Paul. See the thread about the popup everyone was getting.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/battle-for-the-net-july-12-petition-popup.1029678

https://www.namepros.com/threads/internet-freedom-under-attack-says-godaddy.1029626

hmmm. I read it and they are seem against it. Am I missing something?

 

[deez007]

Wait... I am confused.. I was under the impression that NP was against the idiotic concept of regulating the internet?

Ummm @Michael M

"Freedom of speech is one of the few issues both American parties can agree on these days. Unfortunately, a handful of influential politicians want to remove the policies that preserve freedom on the internet. Internet Service Providers like this idea because they'll be able to charge exorbitant fees and censor or slow down websites that compete with their own, thereby promoting their own services.

[NamePros] joined hundreds of other big websites in dedicating July 12 to promoting freedom on the internet. Many of these websites will be using the same popup that you've seen here, although there are a few different wordings that sites can choose from. Others may find different ways to speak out against the pending proposals."

 

[Pierre Barnard]

Net Neutrality = freedom on the internet? NO?

 

[Michael M]

"We've joined hundreds of other big websites in dedicating July 12 to promoting freedom on the internet."
If you just took 1-2 minutes to read what the petition was about it would've been great.
NP supports free internet.

They support "free internet" by supporting Net Neutrality. Which is a true contradiction.

 

[Constantin S]

Ok, this thread must be closed, it only makes people confused over nothing.

 

[Michael M]

Ok, this thread must be closed, it only makes people confused over nothing.

If you think they are against Net Neutrality - then you aren't reading their posts.

What is confusing is how they presented it.

 

[NamePrime]

Net Neutrality = giving cable companies the power over internet?

I thought it's to prevent them from getting it.

 

[Michael M]

Net Neutrality = freedom on the internet? NO?

Depending on your political persuasion or personal views - you may think differently.

But no. Net Neutrality is the opposite of freedom to me. Read the Forbes post I included.