Lord , this president really is the worst ever. Thanks Putin.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FCC Expected to Repeal Net Neutrality Rules in Vote Next Month
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's not about bandwidth. You're clearly not paying attention. Currently ISPs have to treat all internet traffic the same. If net neutrality is repealed, they can offer access to certain websites and services but not others, or they can offer "full-speed" access to Twitch but cap speeds for YouTube or whatever. It turns the internet into cable TV, basically, where you could potentially pay for "packages" of websites that you use frequently, and the rest would cost more. This is not some imaginary threat, this is what repealing net neutrality explicitly allows them to do if they choose.
[doublepost=1511303415][/doublepost]
I don't really understanding this 'trusting' attitude you have. Why do you think ISPs and cable companies are lobbying like hell to get net neutrality repealed. You don't think they plan to profit from its repeal? And next you suggest that legislation will be introduced to prevent companies from taking advantage in the way I described. Guess what, that legislation already exists and is being repealed..
You’re responsible for this then. You supported a person who is part of a political party that protects ISPs and screws the little guy over and over again.
Thanks though, for your sudden discontent with Trump. Maybe with the super, ultra deluxe ISP package, you’ll have the abilty to go back in time and not support Trump.
And it really is a kicker that you’re a Trump supporter “through and through”, right up until he screws you over. Real nice. I’m guessing you’re cool with the massive tax cuts for the rich and corporate class, building the stupid wall, rounding up and deporting brown people no matter what they did outside of skirting the immigration process, banning people of color from coming to the country, dragging those sons of b*tches off the football field for using their freedom of speech, attacking women’s rights to access to birth control and family planning, ripping out climate regulations, banning transgender people from serving in our military, disrespecting Gold Star military families, and SO MUCH MORE, but this is a step too far?
If they do succeed in ripping out net neutrality, the only thing I’ll be able to smile about is the look that’ll be on your face when you can’t access macrumors right along side us all.
Thanks again for your through and through support of a tiny-handed, orange madman who could land us in a nuclear war over a tweet though. At least we won’t know when the tweet that starts it all is sent, since we won’t be able to access Twitter unless we cough up that $19.99/month Social Media package fee.
See link.
https://www.t-mobile.com/offer/binge-on-streaming-video.html
Major companies will get a premium position that allows their services/products to be accessed either better or cheaper.
So you would rather have the government figure it out to benefit consumers? How's Obamacare working for ya, pal? Or the VA?
Yes, you are misreading. And it appears you do not understand economics or human nature.
No, it wasn't. Netflix was a freeloader and getting a free ride since they streamed gigabytes of data off the backs of the ISPs who made the investments in the infrastructure. Sorry, but if Netflix wants to stream gigs of data at the expense of everyone else, fine, but they should pay for it. Why do you think Apple supports Net Neutrality? Because they want to stream their upcoming 4K content with no added cost to the consumer. To that I say tough cookies.
Everybody wants everything for free these days, but it isn't gonna happen. My advice is move out of your parents basement, get a job, and start earning an honest income to pay for the services you use. Life is expensive, brah. Get used to it.
And you're responsible for freeloaders who support government officials like Tom Wheeler and Lois Lerner who screw over responsible citizens for political gain. Own it pal.
What Netflix went through in 2014 had to do with what you seem to think and everything about various peering agreements and Netflix not wanting to pay for the connection. In short, the internet is a very complex object with 1's and 0's not costing $0.00000000. There are costs and long established peering costs have been used. Netflix wanted to stop using commercial ATM's/CDN and peering networks (like Level 3 and others) and build out its own but wanted free access to ISP's. Part of the existing costs structure was based on various load balancing (consuming and producing similar levels of traffic) and Netflix consumes little data but produces lots. This offset the cost structure in the peering in such a way Netflix didn't like.
Then why are we having non elected officials deciding this issue? If our elected officials wish to make these changes, force them to vote and pass the legislation and have the President sign it. I can accept that, because they are elected officials. If I don't like what they pass, I can vote them out of office. I can't vote any of the FCC officials out.
Mueller cant investigate fast enough, get this POS out of office already.
Wish I could like this thousands of times. They can say whatever they want about Hillary but she was clearly the lesser of two evils. These Trump supporters will have to deal with their poor choice and the hate they will get from others.
Last edited:
"Currently ISPs have to treat all internet traffic the same." No. This is not true. For example, nothing stops an ISP having a CDN and this specifically means not all data is the same. You are taking the simple minded absolutist view of NN (and this is the single worst thing that could happen to the internet) and really don't understand how the internet works (or has worked) in the past.
[doublepost=1511305234][/doublepost]
I 100% agree with this. NOTE: Wheeler was not elected. Did you complain when he arbitrarily changed the rules?
I think everything I have to say about it has already been said here. Net neutrality is important. Not just net neutrality, competition laws are a necessity to prevent monopolisation of the industry. I'm hoping Canada gets to its senses and doesn't follow the US, but it could still easily happen.
HOWEVER, I will say that people took the Portugal thing out of context. I visited MEO's website (the website in the picture) and those addons are merely addons to get (if I understood correctly) 10 GB for each service. Additionally, I realised that their internet is a billion times cheaper than here in Canada (14 euros for something that costs $40 here? sign me the f up). Please don't believe what others say and research for yourself before you say something.
HOWEVER, I will say that people took the Portugal thing out of context. I visited MEO's website (the website in the picture) and those addons are merely addons to get (if I understood correctly) 10 GB for each service. Additionally, I realised that their internet is a billion times cheaper than here in Canada (14 euros for something that costs $40 here? sign me the f up). Please don't believe what others say and research for yourself before you say something.
There can easily be competition. The problem is companies don’t want to spend money to get a small portion of the market. As I posted somewhere earlier, why do you think google and fios stopped? Isn’t worth building for a small chunk of customers. Nothing forbids an upstart from forming lol. No company is going to upstart an internet only company. It isn’t worth it.
I don’t believe your scenario will happen at all. It’s also tough to tell until the vote happens which will probably be blocked in the courts immediately.
Again. Show me a single internet package in the US that blocks everything but 20 web-sites. A single package is all I am asking. This is strike 2 in these threads. All I have read so far is maybe this might (you know in the future) perhaps maybe happen. Show me the concrete proof this happened in the nearly 20 years prior to common carrier classification. Show me where it was so broken it needed new regulation to fix it.
I'm opposed to non elected officials making these decisions. Guess what's going to happen in 3 years if a democrat wins the Presidency? The rules will be reinstated.
Show me a reason ISPs have for spending millions on lobbying to have NN overturned OTHER than increasing profits at the expense of customer freedom?
Man these next 3 years the sh-tshow of this administration will continue. Trump and most republicans are taking US down.
Very sad state of affairs considering they still have support from a good chunk of this country.
Very sad state of affairs considering they still have support from a good chunk of this country.
Not necessarily. It depends on three things. 1) Politicians will follow the money, 2) companies will lobby with money and favors to keep the rules, and 3) the American citizen might get used to not having net neutrality.
Who knows. There is lots that need to be undone still going back to the patriot act.
The sad part the sane people who saw Trump as a conman miles away will have to deal with the poor decisions of more than 60m plus idiots.
I'm not worried about blocking sites or censorship. There would be massive lawsuits. What I don't want to see is my bills being jacked up because I watch netfix and my cable company now wants to charge extra for streaming.
Not one on here that is in favor of overturning the rule has ever answered the question I asked.
Do you actually think your bill will go down if you choose not to watch Netflix etc? For example, if you are paying $50 a month for unlimited 100 Mbps service, and you feel you are paying for those who watch Netflix or game a lot, do you believe your isp will lower your service to $40 a month and charge gamers and streamers $50 a month? Or do you believe you will get no relief and still pay $50 a month, while gamers and streamers pay $60 a month? If you believe the latter then you are actually being punished by the ruling as you will experience no benefit, while others are penalized. The argument that you are paying for bigger users will have no merit.
Which is perfectly Constitutional. We're even allowed to start over again if we deem this government to be craptastic.Then we need to rise up against it.
With this new ruling, I look forward to the industry looking out for me, just like Equifax, Wells Fargo, Uber, Target, etc......
In three years we'll have a Liberal Dem President, every state will be a sanctuary state, we'll tear down all walls (well, Zuck gets to keep his), separate men's/women's rooms will be banned, the National Anthem will cease to be played, the Statue of Liberty will be replaced by a Hillary Clinton likeness, and we'll all have net neutrality back in action.
Come on, three years will just fly by.
Go to your local library. There's computers that you can use for free to access the internet. I'm not talking about how this impacts streaming services - the middle and upper classes won't be impacted all that much. It's those in the lower class that get hit the hardest, which creates an even greater separation between those that have and those that don't.