End of Net Neutrality
- Thread starter Making Chimichangas
- Start date
GM_Tood
New member
I never said either way if I supported NN or not. I am trying to 'member what i paid for my current tier of Internet in 2014 and I don't think it was much different. I had Comcast back when they were throttling torrent traffic. Which is really a misnomer, they'd tank your entire download speed while torrent traffic was active.
I agree with you that the Internet is a different bigger beast than in 2014. As someone who works for a company that relies on some of these ISPs to supply fast/reliable/cost effective internet connectivity, as well as the content providers to generate accurate search content for clients and to our/their customers I support an open Internet. Though the concept of open internet (separate topic) in my mind is hard to explain accurately when content is moderated/promoted by apps/search engines/etc based on what type of content is being requested (not talking about any illegal stuff).
So short answer is I would prefer to keep the NN rules in place.
Huskerzoo
New member
I'm more or less an unabashed liberal. I'd love to hear the viewpoint of anyone who supports this. I live in a bit of an echo-chamber. It also seems as though there's a relatively high level of bi-partisan position on being against this move. When I talk to folks (either side of the aisle), there seems to be concern over the influence of money in politics. Everyone has their own solutions, but is this an issue that we could actually get behind on a bi-partisan basis?
Not looking to pick a fight or anything, just some perspective.
Not looking to pick a fight or anything, just some perspective.
BigRedBuster
Active member
Thanks, and sorry if I misinterpreted your views.
I was just hoping there was someone here that supported the other side and could explain it to me.
BigRedBuster
Active member
Here's where I just don't understand the Republicans.
They support certain issues that I see could come back to really bight them in the a$$ later.
Let's say George Soros goes out and buys up the vast majority of ISP companies. Then, he manipulates liberal websites to be more prominent on the internet than conservative sites. Would they be happy then? Liberals wouldn't be happy if the Koch brothers would do that.
Keeping Net Neutrality helps ensure voices are heard.
GM_Tood
New member
What work would you like me to show? You can read my last reply as to how I experienced some of the issues that NN has helped address.
Thanks for your contribution to the topic. :thumbs
commando
Active member
a write up about the chairman of the fcc
https://gizmodo.com/ajit-pai-thinks-youre-stupid-enough-to-buy-this-crap-1821277398
On Thursday, the Republican-dominated Federal Communications Commission and its chairman, Verizon BFF Ajit Pai, will hold a vote on whether to repeal Barack Obama-era net neutrality rules. If passed, the FCC would allow ISPs to begin setting up a tiered internet designed to suck as much money from customers’ pockets as possible while screwing with their ability to access competitors’ content, or really anything that might suck up amounts of bandwidth inconvenient for their profit margins.
https://gizmodo.com/ajit-pai-thinks-youre-stupid-enough-to-buy-this-crap-1821277398
On Thursday, the Republican-dominated Federal Communications Commission and its chairman, Verizon BFF Ajit Pai, will hold a vote on whether to repeal Barack Obama-era net neutrality rules. If passed, the FCC would allow ISPs to begin setting up a tiered internet designed to suck as much money from customers’ pockets as possible while screwing with their ability to access competitors’ content, or really anything that might suck up amounts of bandwidth inconvenient for their profit margins.
GM_Tood
New member
To a certain extent that is already being done...twitter/facebook/google. These sites are promoting/moderating content and user accounts based on specific content being requested or posted. Why are these companies allowed to filter what consumers are seeing? Loss of NN will definitely promote this if ISPs charge more if you want CNN or Fox News based on how the company's political views are.
Landlord
Banned
They're doing that within their free platforms, and based primarily (entirely?) on your online behavior. That's a very, very different thing.
BigRedBuster
Active member
You don't see a difference between a service like Twitter doing this compared to an ISP service?
RedSavage
New member
Full Disclosure: I'm for Net Neutrality.
One of the arguments I've seen is that certain users (people who stream a lot) use a lot more of the ISP's bandwidth when compared with a user that uses it more for social media, online shopping, checking e-mail, things like that. So the rationale is the user who uses more of the bandwidth should be charged more, when they are a more "expensive" customer to the ISP.
One of the arguments I've seen is that certain users (people who stream a lot) use a lot more of the ISP's bandwidth when compared with a user that uses it more for social media, online shopping, checking e-mail, things like that. So the rationale is the user who uses more of the bandwidth should be charged more, when they are a more "expensive" customer to the ISP.
NM11046
Donor
Perhaps, but for your "cheap" service your speed will be cut dramatically, as will your access to certain sites.
funhusker
Active member
I can see that point. But I would have a hard time believing my prices would go lower. The ISP would most likely leave my prices as they are and raise the "streamers".
RedDenver
New member
ISP's can already charge differently based on usage. What they can't do (well, they can now that NN is repealed) is charge differently depending on what sites or content you use.