legal Net Neutrality Has Been Repealed!

[Silentptnr]

I just read that...

F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
WASHINGTON — The Federal Communications Commission voted on Thursday to dismantle rules regulating the businesses that connect consumers to the internet, granting broadband companies the power to potentially reshape Americans’ online experiences.

The agency scrapped the so-called net neutrality regulations that prohibited broadband providers from blocking websites or charging for higher-quality service or certain content. The federal government will also no longer regulate high-speed internet delivery as if it were a utility, like phone service.

Full Story: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/14/technology/net-neutrality-repeal-vote.html

How will this change things?

 

[Dondomainer]

No it is not. What definition are you quoting here? Safety is a basic human need (and expectation in a civilized society). I have absolutely no idea what definition you are using to state that the need for safety is political

It's called natural law

 

[Michael M]

No it is not. What definition are you quoting here? Safety is a basic human need (and expectation in a civilized society). I have absolutely no idea what definition you are using to state that the need for safety is political

If you are going to govern safety over every imaginable circumstance - it then becomes political.

I actually corrected that right after I wrote it as it did not come across correctly.

None-the-less - our differing views on politics are not the topic of discussion here. There is no winning for anyone in that.

Is the 400 page Internet Regulation called Net "Neutrality" good is the topic.

I, obviously, say no.

 

[anantj]

I actually corrected that right after I wrote it as it did not come across correctly.

None-the-less - our differing views on politics are not the topic of discussion here. There is no winning for anyone in that.

Is the 400 page Internet Regulation called Net "Neutrality" good is the topic.

I, obviously, say no.

I still don't agree with your statement of politics wrt to safety but yes, I'm happy to go back to the debate on NN and the regulations around it.

 

[Dondomainer]

I actually corrected that right after I wrote it as it did not come across correctly.

None-the-less - our differing views on politics are not the topic of discussion here. There is no winning for anyone in that.

Is the 400 page Internet Regulation called Net "Neutrality" good is the topic.

I, obviously, say no.

In fact, with respect to this, you are giving up your right, under the premise that you do not need protection in every circumstance VS the companies will have protection for everything even for those things that you do not contemplate.

That is a bad business.

 

[Dondomainer]

 

[Michael M]

In fact, with respect to this, you are giving up your right, under the premise that you do not need protection in every circumstance VS the companies will have protection for everything even for those things that you do not contemplate.

That is a bad business.

I am not giving up any rights by the government not having the ability to regulate something. I can understand that this might not seem right to someone not from the US - but we have a different view that a lot of the rest of the world about freedom and rights. (though things are changing and we are moving your direction at a fast rate)

But that is where this gets drug into politics. I would be happy to debate political leanings with anyone that wants to via PM or another thread - but that is not the topic of this thread.

My point is again. 400 page to say "don't throttle netflix"

That is bloated. You do not have to pass a bloated regulation to get one thing done.

 

[Dondomainer]

I am not giving up any rights by the government not having the ability to regulate something. I can understand that this might not seem right to someone not from the US - but we have a different view that a lot of the rest of the world about freedom and rights. (though things are changing and we are moving your direction at a fast rate)

But that is where this gets drug into politics. I would be happy to debate political leanings with anyone that wants to via PM or another thread - but that is not the topic of this thread.

My point is again. 400 page to say "don't throttle netflix"

That is bloated. You do not have to pass a bloated regulation to get one thing done.

I live in florida for 10 years bro.

 

[Michael M]

I live in florida for 10 years now bro.

My apologies. That was not directed straight at you even though it was in reply to your post.

There are people also posting on here not from the US and I can see where there would be a misunderstanding between types of policies in different parts of the world.

But - none-the-less - I meant no offense to you or anyone by it.

 

[think]

Here's a link to the entire text regarding Net Neutrality:

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf


FWIW The FCC commissioners claim they needed to be detailed in writing this because they knew the issue would be taken to the courts and they had to make sure it was worded properly or the courts would overrule it as they had already done in the past.


For those who would prefer a well laid out synopsis of what NN did rather than reading the entire document here is a CNET.com article from 2015 that lays out the main points in the Net Neutrality document:

https://www.cnet.com/news/13-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-fccs-net-neutrality-regulation/

 

[mr-x]

You're very poorly informed. Please read https://www.cbsnews.com/news/3rd-undersea-cable-cut-hampering-internet/ and a simple google search will several similar incidents

Edit: Small quote from the link above:

Hasn't happened since Thursday. Internet is still humming. Stupid analogy.

 

[think]

Speaking of fake comments:

FCC PUBLISHED FAKE COMMENTS BY DEAD ACTOR PATTY DUKE, SEAN ASTIN'S MOTHER, SUPPORTING END OF NET NEUTRALITY

The son of late acting legend Patty Duke, and half brother of Stranger Things actor Sean Astin, is raising questions about how his mother’s name appeared on comments published on the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) website in support of ending net neutrality—over a year after she died.

http://www.newsweek.com/fcc-published-fake-comments-dead-actor-patty-duke-sean-astins-mother-749139​

 

[mr-x]

Not anymore with the repeal of NN regulations

I think people are getting overheated about this subject. There are real laws not rules made by the FCC that govern all business.

Watch these videos.
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/14/m...rality-debate-with-former-fcc-chairman-video/

There will probably be companies that push boundaries of the law and even break them. That durring NN too.

I think competition will increase as technology improves.

 

[mr-x]

I live in florida for 10 years bro.

Hey, tell Florida man I said hi.

 

[mr-x]

... marketplace will sort things out, just as it did in the creation of what we have had and continue to have in what we know as the internet.

Exactly, as the hardware and software running the network improves, new opportunities will arise.

A few years from now we could have a better decentralized network where wired access is mostly backup service and multiple carriers compete for your attention.

 

[Kate]

The issue is very sensitive and the stakes are huge because Internet access has become a vital need for most people and is not a luxury. It is not an ordinary commodity that you can do without. It is even considered a basic human right.
There is a reason why there was talks of turning some Internet companies like Microsoft into utility status. It is testimony to their importance. Let me emphasize: Internet access is not an ordinary commercial service. It is almost like gas and water.

I am for healthy competition, but also for a level playing field. The above example of Verisign is very appropriate. Imagine if .com was run like .tv, in the absence of regulations and with little predictability.

 

[mr-x]

.. It is even considered a basic human right.

It's an efficient platform for commerce and speech, not a human right.

There is a reason why there was talks of turning some Internet companies like Microsoft into utility status. It is testimony to their importance. Let me emphasize: Internet access is not an ordinary commercial service. It is almost like gas and water.

Gas and Water are luxuries, not rights. No one ever considered turning Microsoft into a utility. Utilities like Gas and Electricity were deregulated in California in the 1980's.

Nothing prevents any local government from providing Internet service as a utility to their citizens.

I am for healthy competition, but also for a level playing field. The above example of Verisign is very appropriate. Imagine if .com was run like .tv, in the absence of regulations and with little predictability.

Imagine how long ICANN would be in charge of the Internet domain system if they introduced chaos in TLD space.

There are anti-trust laws that prevent most of the nightmare scenarios suggested by opponents of a open Internet.

** if you have problem with WEB.com running Verisign and raising prices, petition ICANN.

 

[HotKey]

I am 100% certain that as of yesterday my internet speed slowed dramatically. I actually had to reset my connection and finally got it moving but it definitely was slowed from the provider level.

Not sure whats actually happening.

Probably just coincidence. Modems have to be power-cycled every so often, they get bottle-necked. Other conditions can stem from physical line faults, or networking issues with your equipment.

 

[anantj]

Hasn't happened since Thursday. Internet is still humming. Stupid analogy.

no this is not an analogy. This was an actual occurence. You're being obtusely blind to an actual event is stupid.

 

[anantj]

There will probably be companies that push boundaries of the law and even break them. That durring NN too.

Yes, and breaking the law is, * drumroll * , illegal. My response was exactly about something being legal or not being legal. And throttling specific apps or content *was* illegal and is not with the repeal of NN

 

[mr-x]

Yes, and breaking the law is, * drumroll * , illegal. My response was exactly about something being legal or not being legal. And throttling specific apps or content *was* illegal and is not with the repeal of NN

When it was proven that AT&T throttled service, they were punished, correct?

 

[anantj]

When it was proven that AT&T throttled service, they were punished, correct?

Why were they punished? Under what law or regulation?

 

[mr-x]

no this is not an analogy. This was an actual occurence. You're being obtusely blind to an actual event is stupid.

Comparing an accident that disrupted service for millions to NN reversal is stupid. This was not an accident and service hasn't been disrupted. So we'll just disagree.

 

[anantj]

Comparing an accident that disrupted service to millions is stupid. This was not an accident and no-one service has been disrupted. So we'll just disagree.

Why don't you re-read the sub-thread this example was for? You asked for a relevant example and I gave one. This was a factual and a real incident that happened and one which you dismissed as never having happened. Having been proven wrong, you're now just dismissing it as stupid when it was exactly and completely relevant to your original "argument".

 

[mr-x]

Why were they punished? Under what law or regulation?

Not sure where you live, but in the USA, rules agreed to by committee at the FCC, FTC are are based on the laws passed by congress.

NN was a reclassification of ISP's to phone companies with added rules. The current administration disagreed and changed the classification back to data carriers... which they are.

 

[anantj]

Not sure where you live, but in the USA, rules agreed to by committee at the FCC, FTC are are based on the laws passed by congress.

NN was a reclassification of ISP's to phone companies with added rules. The current administration disagreed and changed the classification back to data carriers... which they are.

Precisely. NN was also a set of regulations that was under the rules/laws at the time. The regulations have been repealed as they are inconvenient or disagreeable to the current politicians in control of the house. But the point again is that Net Neutrality prevented the exact occurrence that happened with AT&T's misbehaviour. Something that they can now indulge in again without any fear of punishment