mobb_deep 917 Posted December 14, 2017 Bottom line. Will I have to pay for porn? Not, but it will be like watching it on a 28k modem. Hope you don't get buffering right before climax. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 3,594 Posted December 14, 2017 Not, but it will be like watching it on a 28k modem. Hope you don't get buffering right before climax. cause thats how it was in 2015? jeez you guys act like its a roll back to 1998 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Djgb13 2,338 Posted December 14, 2017 Not, but it will be like watching it on a 28k modem. Hope you don't get buffering right before climax. Back to magazines with sticky pages it is Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 3,594 Posted December 14, 2017 fwiw I have Frontier, which was formerly Verizon West they offer speeds of 5, 25, 50, 75, 100, 150, 300 already Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZeroTolerance 582 Posted December 14, 2017 It means internet services will likely be treated like cable television, and who doesn't love how cable television is operated? 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 3,594 Posted December 14, 2017 Another example is TMobile now offers Netflix for free to all customers, that is a good thing you guys like to get over dramatic about nothing, this is another example Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iam90sbaby 2,125 Posted December 14, 2017 Bottom line. Will I have to pay for porn? $1 FFToday access $5 PornHub access $5 Coinbase access $10 Xbox $3 Amazon It would be something like that. Different services would be in different group packages it will be designed to make you feel like you are paying less but you are actually getting LESS data and paying more for the same thing. Without net neutrality each service or website etc... that you go to could potentially be an extra charge. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 3,594 Posted December 14, 2017 To clarify...net neutrality is a good thing...losing it is the bad thing. It’s the equivalent of voting for freedom or against freedom lol. freedom, does not and will not ever mean more regulations Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,662 Posted December 14, 2017 Eh, I think Edjr has shown us almost all of the internet by now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ROCKFORD 134 Posted December 14, 2017 On 11/24/2017 at 8:56 AM, GroveDiesel said I guarantee that most people simply don't understand it and so just ignore the issue. Only when it's too late and they realize that they'll have to pay more for internet access and more to access certain sites and services will people finally understand and be upset. But it will be too late by then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TD Ryan2 314 Posted December 14, 2017 removing net neutrality gives ISPs (Comcast, Verizon, etc) too much control over what can be delivered to you via internet and how good/fast it can be delivered. all internet content is currently equally accessible and deliverable... the OWNER of the content may charge you or restrict you, but not the ISP... the ISP is just a delivery system. Removing net neutrality will force both the consumers and content creators to abide by the ISP's rules, fees, etc. It's kinda' like privatizing the US Highway system... and hypothetically once the super religious owner of the Red Sox buys a piece of the highway, he doesn't allow access to any nudie bars or Yankee stadium. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 3,594 Posted December 14, 2017 $1 FFToday access $5 PornHub access $5 Coinbase access $10 Xbox $3 Amazon It would be something like that. Different services would be in different group packages it will be designed to make you feel like you are paying less but you are actually getting LESS data and paying more for the same thing. Without net neutrality each service or website etc... that you go to could potentially be an extra charge. thats not how its going to be, red herring Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 3,594 Posted December 14, 2017 It means internet services will likely be treated like cable television, and who doesn't love how cable television is operated? good, cable companies made other companies push for things like Roku Amazon Fire TV Streaming Boxes Smart TV's Sling Playstation Vue Apple TV and much more all things that give us OTHER options than paying for Cable I would much rather have all the options we have today, than being stuck in 2004 with Cable or Directv as only options Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyclone24 1,814 Posted December 14, 2017 I admit I know next to nothing on this so bear with me. But the concern about nickel-and-diming seems to me almost like worrying that the gas station across the street...because they can...Will suddenly raise their rates. Why would they? When everyone can just go to the gas station on the other side of the street. They could make their pumps go slower. But why would they when the station across the street will pump the gas just like it was? I tend to side on the less regulations to better but how is my analogy incorrect? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mobb_deep 917 Posted December 14, 2017 Verizon and Comcast, the two biggest companies for ISP were for NN, why do you think that? Cause it eliminates any and all potential competitors just think back to the time when Verizon and ATT were the 2 major cell phone companies, then Sprint came up with unlimited everything for cheaper. Now they all have it, and there are alot of other wireless companies available for even cheaper than the big 4 Cricket, Metro, etc Sorry, but that's 100% FAKE NEWS. Just like you aren't quite sure if you're even for or against net neutrality. They're using vague and tricky language to confuse people like yourself (not saying you're stupid). Verizon alone filed several lawsuits challenging the FCC's authority to impose net neutrality rules. https://www.inverse.com/article/38734-net-neutrality-att-verizon-charter-comcast AT&T Comments on Net Neutrality: The latest: AT&T’s message can easily trip up readers. A page on AT&T’s website states in large letters, “We support an open internet.” But below this statement that seems to be in support of net neutrality, AT&T speaks out against the net neutrality regulations. The company claimed 15.7 million subscribers as of Q3 2017 and seems cautious at best and deceptive at worst in its appearance to advocate net neutrality — and in its call on customers to join with them in advocating their stance. Verizon Comments on Net Neutrality: The latest: Verizon released a video back in April where one of its top legal counselors tries to explain that the FCC is not actually killing net neutrality. But a lot of what he says is deceptive or simply not true. Memorably, The Verge examined those comments in a scathing breakdown. Below is the video. First question, where in the hell did they film this video? Beyond that, this video glosses over the specifics and leans heavily into over-simplified examples and emotive gestures. Basically, Verizon doesn’t want the internet to be treated as a utility, in spite of how important access to the internet is for tens of millions of people to find jobs, get an education, connect with the community, or just kick back and watch Rick and Morty episodes. Comcast Comments on Net Neutrality: The latest: Comcast commended the FCC for its work to repeal the net neutrality laws in a corporate blog post this week, which also says that the company “will not block, throttle, or discriminate against lawful content.” Comcast, the largest broadband provider at 25.5 million subscribers, met with the FCC earlier this month to talk about ways to prevent states from enacting their own net neutrality laws. Charter Comments on Net Neutrality: The latest: Charter — which also markets as Charter Spectrum — is second-largest broadband provider with 23.6 million subscribers. The CEO of Charter said the FCC’s plan would “spur investment in and the deployment of the next generation of broadband.” Since it merged with Time Warner in 2016, Charter has been staunch in saying it has voluntarily adhered to net neutrality rules as one of the biggest internet companies. However, it’s unclear what kind of effect the repeal of net neutrality would have. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gladiators 1,904 Posted December 14, 2017 I'm focked if I get charged to use search websites Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Djgb13 2,338 Posted December 14, 2017 I dont think itll get down to companies charging you different prices for certain things like social media access, gaming access, streaming access, etc. They know there would be a revolt on their hands. Too many eyes are watching this for them to do anything and the first sign of them focking over the consumer people like Buzzfeed will be all over it. Either way, nothing you can do except b1tch and moan. If it comes down to me having to pay more for sh1t then I guess Ill just have to pay more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted December 14, 2017 FCC just voted 3-2 to overturn net neutrality rules. What does this mean? Not for nothing, but Trump brought in a ringer for the SEC. They used to be a rule that certain media companies could only control X percentage of Television markets. He brought in a guy to completely nuke that rule. He did so-so Sinclair broadcasting which makes Fox News look like PBS could come in and control all of the independent local stations in the country. I think they have about an 80% footprint thanks to the new ruling by this fantastic FCC. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iam90sbaby 2,125 Posted December 14, 2017 I dont think itll get down to companies charging you different prices for certain things like social media access, gaming access, streaming access, etc. They know there would be a revolt on their hands. Too many eyes are watching this for them to do anything and the first sign of them focking over the consumer people like Buzzfeed will be all over it. Either way, nothing you can do except b1tch and moan. If it comes down to me having to pay more for sh1t then I guess Ill just have to pay more. What other incentive do they have to do this? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big Guy 1,400 Posted December 14, 2017 I am against it the fact that Google, Amazon, Yahoo, Youtube, Facebook are all for it, tells me everything I need to know ditto Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Djgb13 2,338 Posted December 14, 2017 What other incentive do they have to do this? I highly doubt itll happen. At least not for another decade if it even happens. The amount of PR blowback would be too much and people would be canceling left and right. Then someone would pop up with the old ways of providing internet and they would become the big fish. Rinse and repeat. Its common business practice man. Doesnt take a genius to figure it out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iam90sbaby 2,125 Posted December 14, 2017 I highly doubt itll happen. At least not for another decade if it even happens. The amount of PR blowback would be too much and people would be canceling left and right. Then someone would pop up with the old ways of providing internet and they would become the big fish. Rinse and repeat. Its common business practice man. Doesnt take a genius to figure it out Oh okay, thanks for clearing that up. So why do it? If ultimately the goal is to "get back to how it was.". ----- I am all for the free market and am very anti-regulation but this is focking stupid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZeroTolerance 582 Posted December 14, 2017 I admit I know next to nothing on this so bear with me. But the concern about nickel-and-diming seems to me almost like worrying that the gas station across the street...because they can...Will suddenly raise their rates. Why would they? When everyone can just go to the gas station on the other side of the street. They could make their pumps go slower. But why would they when the station across the street will pump the gas just like it was? I tend to side on the less regulations to better but how is my analogy incorrect? The most likely issue to pop up first will be ISPs trying to throttle speeds or block content that would compete with their own services (like Comcast for example limiting Netflix because it competes with their own video on demand services, or like Verizon's attempt to block Google Pay in order to promote their own version). 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Djgb13 2,338 Posted December 14, 2017 The most likely issue to pop up first will be ISPs trying to throttle speeds or block content that would compete with their own services (like Comcast for example limiting Netflix because it competes with their own video on demand services, or like Verizon's attempt to block Google Pay in order to promote their own version). I could see this happening or attempted. But then I think they would catch so much negativity for it they would have to revert. But I could be wrong about that. However, this is the thing that I could see coming from it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyclone24 1,814 Posted December 14, 2017 The most likely issue to pop up first will be ISPs trying to throttle speeds or block content that would compete with their own services (like Comcast for example limiting Netflix because it competes with their own video on demand services, or like Verizon's attempt to block Google Pay in order to promote their own version). So in your example it would jam people up but then using my example they just wouldn't have another gas station to go to for netflix correct? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,317 Posted December 14, 2017 So other than the stupid guy that reflexively hates all regulation, we agree this is a terrible thing? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimmySmith 2,782 Posted December 14, 2017 The most likely issue to pop up first will be ISPs trying to throttle speeds or block content that would compete with their own services (like Comcast for example limiting Netflix because it competes with their own video on demand services, or like Verizon's attempt to block Google Pay in order to promote their own version). In order to block content, there is an assumption that content will be monitored. The FCC just gave them the right to monitor at will. (And block at will.) Makes you wonder about the usefulness of VPNs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OldMaid 1,838 Posted December 14, 2017 Here’s a great example: I have AT&T. Before net neutrality, I always had problems streaming Netflix. Turns out, they were intentionally slowing down speeds, and eventually struck a deal with Netflix to have them pay more $$$ for a faster connection. Netflix said it was AT&T’s fault, and of course AT&T blamed Netflix. I also believe that corresponded to the time of the first Netflix price hike. Might be a coincidence, but probably not. All I know... since net neutrality, I haven’t had any such problems. And now that more ISP,s own content providers, it’s only going to get worse. (ie: AT&T owning Directv and in the middle of acquiring Time Warner, which owns HBO. TMobile just bought Layer3 a cable startup and Verizon owns I can’t remember off the top of my head.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mobb_deep 917 Posted December 14, 2017 So other than the stupid guy that reflexively hates all regulation, we agree this is a terrible thing? Big Guy hates NN too. So, I'm sure that also means GoColts hates it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gladiators 1,904 Posted December 14, 2017 Does this mean all races have to get along now, or that we don't? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TD Ryan2 314 Posted December 14, 2017 I need an explanation on how removing net neutrality will open up competition (i.e. gas station across the street). With net-neut - the ISPs deliver all content equally Withoutt net-neut - the ISPs manage content but somehow new ISP can compete for comsumers? Why can't we have both? equal content and ISP competition. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iam90sbaby 2,125 Posted December 14, 2017 I could see this happening or attempted. But then I think they would catch so much negativity for it they would have to revert. But I could be wrong about that. However, this is the thing that I could see coming from it There aren't enough internet providers for the free market to take affect, what do you not understand? Deals are just going to get made behind the scenes... thats it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tanatastic 2,061 Posted December 14, 2017 So other than the stupid guy that reflexively hates all regulation, we agree this is a terrible thing? A literal everybody wants net nuetrality. This thread is the very first I have seen a single person on the whole internet saying they want it gone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vikings4ever 496 Posted December 14, 2017 I think NN is a better rule of thumb than a hard and fast rule. Should ISPs block certain sites? No. Should customers have to pay more to access certain sites? No. I can live with the so-called "fast lanes". But the advertised speed should be the standard speed, not the fast lane speed. Though you can make the case for regulations about how ISPs treat traffic to sites they own (ie Comcast streaming NBC shows faster than other service's shows). I'm also OK with companies paying so their sites don't count against data caps (though, again, you can make the case for regulations with sites they own). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,662 Posted December 14, 2017 Thanks Obama. For the faster internet speeds. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,317 Posted December 14, 2017 A literal everybody wants net nuetrality. This thread is the very first I have seen a single person on the whole internet saying they want it gone. Just goes to show how far gone a few here really are. That said even those guys are the fringe of the fringe Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZeroTolerance 582 Posted December 14, 2017 So in your example it would jam people up but then using my example they just wouldn't have another gas station to go to for netflix correct? But does everyone in the country have multiple ISPs that service their area (and not talking about some of those half-assed small companies with limited speeds and poor service)? In Raider's example, a bunch of cable alternative services arose using the internet as an alternate delivery method... But now what would be the alternative delivery method to that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyclone24 1,814 Posted December 14, 2017 Right for you guys complaining about this vote this was only since 2015 correct? I don't recall it being complete chaos before 2015 was it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Djgb13 2,338 Posted December 14, 2017 There aren't enough internet providers for the free market to take affect, what do you not understand? Deals are just going to get made behind the scenes... thats it. Maybe not yet. But once they start doing those back door deals? Oh yea someone is going to open up shop. What dont YOU understand? Thats how business works. Combine that with the PR nightmare these companies will have if they do that and one comes along offering everything all at one price and no throttling then the consumers will cancel their current internet and go with the other company. Im not saying getting rid of NN is a good thing but DAM youre acting like a frightened little puppy pissing the floor over this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alias Detective 1,179 Posted December 14, 2017 I am against it the fact that Google, Amazon, Yahoo, Youtube, Facebook are all for it, tells me everything I need to know I am for it, cause as we saw in the cell phone wars, eventually its a benefit for all Once there was only Sprint offering unlimited, now they all do I have no problem paying more for stuff I use Share this post Link to post Share on other sites