legal Net Neutrality Has Been Repealed!

[DaveX]

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?

 

[Michael M]

the door is open for things like this :

ISPs slow down all new business website asking for money, only the big platforms like amazon, .wix have preferential treatment. so how many new companies want pay for this ?....- Next say goodbye to the domain business

so tell me again, we dont need regulation ?

We don't need 400 pages of regulation on the Internet Industry.

You asked, and received!

But on a serious note - I'd say the big guys would be in more danger of being throttled that any upcoming business that does not even have a domain yet. But that's just me looking at 1+1=2. I understand math can work differently these days.

 

[Michael M]

If GM were to compose Automotive Neutrality Regulation - do you think it would favor the new car company?
If Starbucks were to compose Coffee Neutrality Regulation - do you think it would favor the new coffee company?
If McDonalds were to compose FastFood Neutrality Regulation - do you think it would favor a new fast food company?

So why do you trust Google and Amazon to write regulation that would favor the new and upcoming internet company?

 

[pokainc]

We don't need 400 pages of regulation on the Internet Industry.

You asked, and received!

But on a serious note - I'd say the big guys would be in more danger of being throttled that any upcoming business that does not even have a domain yet. But that's just me looking at 1+1=2. I understand math can work differently these days.

Just to bust your b***s buddy, 1+1=2 , but if you add the time factor, that's not always the case

Also I don't trust the big companies what-so-ever, but in this case their interest (afraid of getting throttled) coincides with the interest of many smaller companies and anti-censorship advocates.

 

[Michael M]

Just to bust your b***s buddy, 1+1=2 , but if you add the time factor, that's not always the case

But that formula is 1+1+T=V... Different equation. The math has stayed constant.

 

[pokainc]

But that formula is 1+1+T=V... Different equation. The math has stayed constant.

Had some advanced math courses back in the day.. never had the "T" introduced in the equations I had seen.. guess there's something to learn everyday.

I guess T & A means Time and Acceleration

 

[Michael M]

I personally assigned T as the time value. I believe that is allowed. I did not know I was supposed to pull out textbook variables to respond to that.

I never thought of T & A as Time and Acceleration - but I must admit T & A does seem to speed up time!

 

[Dondomainer]

I personally assigned T as the time value. I believe that is allowed. I did not know I was supposed to pull out textbook variables to respond to that.

I never thought of T & A as Time and Acceleration - but I must admit T & A does seem to speed up time!

Why we don't need 400 pages of regulation on the Internet Industry ?

Maybe because companies can not take advantage, because suddenly without regulations, companies give up to earn trillions, why we don't need 400 pages of regulation on the Internet Industry ?

not taking advantage of non-regulation is bad business, knowing today the traffic that produce sites Facebook, Google, Youtube, etc etc.

I do not understand your ingenuity.

Capitalism without consumer protection, is to go back 50 years, just because companies want to squeeze anything before moving on to something cheaper or new,

example : Comcast VS Google Fiber

do you think Comcast does not have the technology to offer more speeds for the same price ? ,. K'mo

 

[Dondomainer]

Today the interner providers have nothing more to offer that speed, but they have seen many billionaire businesses grow from his terminals they know, that they are the door between the two sides, that's why they need to look for a new product and the product today is the same internet, fragmented, packaged, only because if there is no regulation, then it is normal that they want to do it.

 

[Michael M]

Why we don't need 400 pages of regulation on the Internet Industry ?

Maybe because companies can not take advantage, because suddenly without regulations, companies give up to earn trillions, why we don't need 400 pages of regulation on the Internet Industry ?

not taking advantage of non-regulation is bad business, knowing today the traffic that produce sites Facebook, Google, Youtube, etc etc.

I do not understand your ingenuity.

Capitalism without consumer protection, is to go back 50 years, just because companies want to squeeze anything before moving on to something cheaper or new,

example : Comcast VS Google Fiber

do you think Comcast does not have the technology to offer more speeds for the same price ? ,. K'mo

Comcast has the right to to make a profit and decide how their network is utilized. We do still currently at this moment live under (sort of) a Free Market.

They built their company, they installed the pipeline, they provide the manpower to maintain and support the network, and they should be able to make their own business decisions.

If they make bad decisions - the free market will topple them - and someone new will come to offer what they wont.

But that is getting into governmental systems and debates on which is better. The climate is too vitriolic and the atmosphere is too cloudy for us to debate it in this light. That's why I think this is even a debate right now. It is politics and about moving in a direction with no step back. It was a perfect time to enact it a couple of years ago (and I guess repeal it now) - since we can't debate it in a productive manner without getting bogged down in personal beliefs on how government and corporations should operate.

No one can win the which "politics is better" argument on either side.

Either way this bill was written by the Internet Giants, named something that makes people feel comfortable, and regulated in as 400 pages of who knows what.

It is now gone. Finished. Done. And we are all better for it.

We can come back here and argue to our hearts content when the next administration brings something similar back.

Until then we can wait and see if your fears come true - I am willing to bet they dont. The internet worked just fine before it (was not around long) and that is how the internet and innovation actually thrived. More innovation happened without it existing - than with it. Google and Amazon happened without it. Would they have happened with it? No one knows.

 

[Dondomainer]

Comcast has the right to to make a profit and decide how their network is utilized. We do still currently at this moment live under (sort of) a Free Market.

They built their company, they installed the pipeline, they provide the manpower to maintain and support the network, and they should be able to make their own business decisions.

If they make bad decisions - the free market will topple them - and someone new will come to offer what they wont.

But that is getting into governmental systems and debates on which is better. The climate is too vitriolic and the atmosphere is too cloudy for us to debate it in this light. That's why I think this is even a debate right now. It is politics and about moving in a direction with no step back. It was a perfect time to enact it a couple of years ago (and I guess repeal it now) - since we can't debate it in a productive manner without getting bogged down in personal beliefs on how government and corporations should operate.

No one can win the which "politics is better" argument on either side.

Either way this bill was written by the Internet Giants, named something that makes people feel comfortable, and regulated in as 400 pages of who knows what.

It is now gone. Finished. Done. And we are all better for it.

We can come back here and argue to our hearts content when the next administration brings something similar back.

Until then we can wait and see if your fears come true - I am willing to bet they dont. The internet worked just fine before it (was not around long) and that is how the internet and innovation actually thrived. More innovation happened without it existing - than with it. Google and Amazon happened without it. Would they have happened with it? No one knows.

Free market whit Trump ?..- it's a joke right.

 

[Michael M]

Free market whit Trump ?..- it's a joke right.

I am not a "Trumper" - but no I am not referencing that Trump = Free Market.

I am saying America from it's founding was a Free Market.

And until we aren't anymore - we are.

 

[Dondomainer]

I am not a "Trumper" - but no I am not referencing that Trump = Free Market.

I am saying America from it's founding was a Free Market.

And until we aren't anymore - we are.

by the way, the free market is highly regulated in US. ..so..- I do not understand you

 

[Michael M]

by the way, the free market is highly regulated in US. ..so..- I do not understand you

It's been painfully obvious that you don't. I see no purpose in explaining the difference between common sense regulation and over-regulation - or how politics progress, or political corruption, or whatever else other alleys we could go down with this...

I believe I understand you. I understand the gist of your politics. I don't even attack them. I just don't agree with them,

 

[pokainc]

@Michael M
Man, did you already forget the crash of 2008?

You leave powerful corporation with ultimate power regarding MAJOR crucial resources (money, internet) and leave it to "100% open market" as you like, and you eventually get a firestorm.

Greed and Profits can't be the ONLY thing that counts. When you enter an industry that impacts billions, there has to be at least some minimal oversight. Being allowed to provide internet and have billions of data points is a privilege as it can go as far as affecting national security.

Just like gambling addicts can't be left in front of a slot machine or blackjack tables even if they say they'll control themselves, you can't leave huge Corporations with 0 oversight....

Also, please stop using the term politics..... has nothing to do with anything... it's opinions... someone from any party can have any type of business opinion.

 

[Michael M]

@Michael M
Man, did you already forget the crash of 2008?

You leave powerful corporation with ultimate power regarding MAJOR crucial resources (money, internet) and leave it to "100% open market" as you like, and you eventually get firestorm.

Greed and Profits can't be the ONLY thing that counts. When you enter an industry that impacts billions, there has to be at least some minimal oversight. Being allowed to provide internet and have billions of data points is a privilege as it can go as far as affecting national security.

Just like gambling addicts can't be left in front of a slot machine or blackjack tables even if they say they'll control themselves, you can't leave huge Corporations with 0 oversight....

Capitalism vs Socialism.

Freedom vs (over)Regulation

Great debates to have. But that should not be the topic of your concern about Netflix being throttled.

 

[Michael M]

To add: I believe in common sense regulation. I think I've said that a few times now.

Again - pass your bill - where it only does what you want it to - and I won't fight you.

Pass 400 pages of who knows what written by HUGE corporations which should scare you from your logic.... And I will oppose it.

 

[pokainc]

It is directly linked.

Stop obsessing only with Netflix and Google, etc...

If potential throttling and shutting down a website is allowed.. that can curtail free Speech, certain businesses' development and more.

Maybe they should have a mid-way point; if you're traffic surpasses I don't know how many million or billion gigs of bandwidth, then you would have to pay a premium.

But not widesweeping powers over everyone. A very high threshold has to be reached first.

 

[Michael M]

It is directly linked.

Stop obsessing only with Netflix and Google, etc...

If potential throttling and shutting down a website is allowed.. that can curtail free Speech, certain businesses' development and more.

It is in a sense - but this political automosphere is ripe for pushing agendas. I don't think anyone will disagree with me on that.

I have the personal belief your emotions had been played to pass something not in your interest.

So I oppose it. I opposed it two years ago before it was "law", and still oppose it now that it is gone.

Maybe they should have a mid-way point; if you're traffic surpasses I don't know how many million or billion gigs of bandwidth, then you would have to pay a premium.

But not widesweeping powers over everyone. A very high threshold has to be reached first.

See now we are talking how we should be on this subject. This whole thread should be about what your guys concerns are and how to address them appropriately and intelligently. Not emotionally.

 

[pokainc]

"I have the personal belief your emotions have been played to pass something not in your interest."

Not a kid. And I run my own business. Just that statement says that you think we're naive people who can't make up their minds without outside influence.. we don't know each other.. but trust me that isn't the case. That's just your condescending thinking.

"See now we are talking how we should be on this subject. This whole thread should be about what your guys concerns are and how to address them appropriately and intelligently. Not emotionally.".... So far I didn't see you suggest anything of the sort... You were "as emotional" since you want to put it that way about freedom of markets vs our thinking of a "logical freedom of markets".

 

[Michael M]

We are on page 11 now. I have said lots of things as I have lots of views on different things.

I tried to keep this subject narrow beyond the politics as much as I could, prior.

And I have my view - It is not personally you I am trying to protect - but the industry as a whole. You are included in that.
And I am not trying to treat you like a kid and tell you how to handle your business - That is what a regulation does.