Net Neutrality 2014

[wolf39us]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZMHcnupioc

[CapnAwesome]

I don't really understand the net neutrality scare. I mean the ideas that he's presented just don't jive with reality. It's borderline conspiracy theory. If internet providers were really going to do that, they would of by now. The market has done great with the internet, which is the ultimate source of free speech. I'd much rather keep it as is rather than give the government any control.

[wolf39us]

I don't really understand the net neutrality scare. I mean the ideas that he's presented just don't jive with reality. It's borderline conspiracy theory. If internet providers were really going to do that, they would of by now. The market has done great with the internet, which is the ultimate source of free speech. I'd much rather keep it as is rather than give the government any control.

I'm not so sure I agree with you here. If you give ISPs the power to strike deals with media providers and are given the ability to restrict access or otherwise limit access to other websites that the ISP isn't fond of, then you strip the abilities of smaller businesses.

If visiting a video streaming service (who couldn't afford to pay these "premium" charges like Netflix has with Comcast) will result in slow or choppy video streams, then who will want to use them? Those businesses could not afford to get their feet off the ground and are squelched before even getting out on the playing field!

Why strike down Net Neutrality if this isn't the case? Companies want to squash competition and this is bad for innovation.

Not to mention for all of you torrent users like myself, the ISP will now have the ability to shut that down without question.

[SteelCurtain]

The FCC proposal would require the ISPs to have a 'baseline' level of service for all sites, but premium services who paid a fee would get preferential treatment.

So the switch meddling that you are afraid of won't happen. They can't turn off torrent downloads, until there is a ruling specifically on that. Which I would expect sometime in the next 5 years.

http://mashable.com/2014/04/23/fcc-propo...eutrality/

The FCC's proposal would fall somewhere in the middle, allowing ISPs some discretion to negotiate with content providers while maintaining a minimum level of access and service to all sites and subscribers.
...
That standard would apparently replace the discrimination clause of the 2010 rules, which forced service providers to treat all Internet traffic as equal. The FCC said that under the new rules, "broadband providers would need to act in a commercially reasonable manner subject to review on a case-by-case basis." It said it would seek public comment on "the construction of a 'commercially reasonable' standard, and the manner in which disputes would be resolved."

The worry here is what the FCC could be pressured into calling "commercially reasonable," and how many tiers they are willing to allow ISPs to make. So if the baseline is actually commercially reasonable, say 2-5mbps as opposed to 15-20mbps for the premium services, and there are several tiers in between, it would be tolerable for a user like me, but I see the slippery slope argument.

It would be better for all if Net Neutrality were upheld.

[Minimalist]

John Oliver discusses Net Neutrality.

http://mashable.com/2014/06/02/john-oliv...eutrality/

[Dragonetti]

Net Neutrality will hinder the progress of small companies. Prices will raise, as companies broken backroom deals to not compete.

Also, we lag behind other countries in terms of speed and connectivity.

John Oliver's segment would shed light on these backroom deals.

[Minimalist]

Prices will raise, as companies broken backroom deals to not compete.

Ssshhh! Some people call that "the invisible hand of the market."

[Dragonetti]

Many utilities already have done this! Which is why there are regulations by the government.

Internet needs to be consider a basic utility.

[Jackalope]

I don't really understand the net neutrality scare. I mean the ideas that he's presented just don't jive with reality. It's borderline conspiracy theory. If internet providers were really going to do that, they would of by now. The market has done great with the internet, which is the ultimate source of free speech. I'd much rather keep it as is rather than give the government any control.

I haven't watched this particular video, so I don't know what this guy's beef is - however, to understand one of the issues behind the push for net neutrality, consider what has actually happened.

Some of Comcast's links to top-tier bandwidth providers are saturated a good part of the time. Comcast blames Netflix, and tries to shake them down for $, and threatening to throttle streams from Netflix to Comcast customers.

The underlying issue (that Comcast has grossly oversubscribed it's uplinks) remains un-addressed. In addition, there is suspicion that what Comcast is *really* doing is attempting to discourage use of streaming services in order to promote it's own On Demand (i.e. pay-per-view) service.

Netflix has offered to install a caching server on Comcast's network gratis to alleviate the uplink bandwith issues (as they will do with any internet provider of sufficient size), Comcast refused.

There are, I am sure, many other examples of abuse, but this one I am intimately familiar with, in that I am subject to a regional Comcast monopoly on high-speed service.

[MindForgedManacle]

I don't really understand the net neutrality scare. I mean the ideas that he's presented just don't jive with reality. It's borderline conspiracy theory. If internet providers were really going to do that, they would of by now. The market has done great with the internet, which is the ultimate source of free speech. I'd much rather keep it as is rather than give the government any control.

They haven't done it because they haven't been allowed to. However, they're already starting to do it, the most well-known case being with Netflix.