FCC Expected to Repeal Net Neutrality Rules in Vote Next Month

[VulchR]

Hi! I'm here from the electric company. I see that you are powering your TV and your computer with our electricity, which is great! But I'm afraid I'll have to unplug those Christmas lights you've got up; you can't use our electricity for those unless you subscribe to our "holiday" service package. Oh, and that light you have in the back yard can only be powered by our electricity if you subscribe to our "security" package. Have a nice day!
...

Stop putting ideas into robber-baron's heads.

 

[blackfox]

Let me respond by way of an (excellent) web comic:
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality

 

[Diorama]

What has the government ever touched or regulated that helped the consumer? We don't need this in place. We need companies competing versus each other which creates better products and service. You don't need that regulated. Otherwise, it will all be the same. You guys are so worried about the "What if.... they charge $5/mo for Netflix". Guess what? Then the competitor won't charge that forcing the other company to not offer it as well. It's called capitalism! REAL Capitalism that isn't the kind you hear the left always talk about as being "bad". Government is a joke. Private companies and the people are what drives it all.

Like the fantastic American healthcare system.

 

[blackfox]

I think there is a fundamental disconnect between being beholden to a virtual monopoly ISP-wise, and who's to blame for less-than-stellar internet speeds. It's certainly has nothing to do with Net Neutrality-and very little to do with the Government (unless you want anti trust issues to be raised)

 

[Glockworkorange]

Hi! I'm here from the electric company. I see that you are powering your TV and your computer with our electricity, which is great! But I'm afraid I'll have to unplug those Christmas lights you've got up; you can't use our electricity for those unless you subscribe to our "holiday" service package. Oh, and that light you have in the back yard can only be powered by our electricity if you subscribe to our "security" package. Have a nice day!


The problem with Internet access in this country is that there is just one company who owns the wires connected to your house, and so if you want to use those wires, you do what that company tells you to do. This is why electricity, water, gas, and other utilities are heavily regulated; it's not like you have a choice of providers.

So yeah, I want the government to impose regulations here. Until any ISP can use the wires connected to my house, I want them treated as the monopoly that they are.

Have ISP's done what the evil electric company employee did in your example above?

Lord, you people are hysterical.

 

[jpietrzak8]

Have ISP's done what the evil electric company employee did in your example above?

Lord, you people are hysterical.

I guess you're a young one, aren't you? I still remember the days, long long ago, when I had to try and wrangle with machines that connected to the net via AOL. They generally controlled what you could reach on the net, mainly by imposing their own custom web browser and email service on you. They had their own news service, their own search engine, and their own forum boards. In short, they profited by using their control over your access to the network.

Really, all you need to know about how the Internet would function without net neutrality is to simply look at how large scale networking functioned in the days before the ARPA-designed "Internet" became the structure everyone used. Because there was no net neutrality at that time. People migrated away from systems like AOL because unfettered access to the universe of data available on the web was better.

EDIT: You've probably never heard this little snippet, but at one time the AOL "you've got mail!" sound-bite became (in)famous because so many people were using AOL for their e-mail (whether they wanted to or not):

 

[Glockworkorange]

I guess you're a young one, aren't you? I still remember the days, long long ago, when I had to try and wrangle with machines that connected to the net via AOL. They generally controlled what you could reach on the net, mainly by imposing their own custom web browser and email service on you. They had their own news service, their own search engine, and their own forum boards. In short, they profited by using their control over your access to the network.

Really, all you need to know about how the Internet would function without net neutrality is to simply look at how large scale networking functioned in the days before the ARPA-designed "Internet" became the structure everyone used. Because there was no net neutrality at that time. People migrated away from systems like AOL because unfettered access to the universe of data available on the web was better.

EDIT: You've probably never heard this little snippet, but at one time the AOL "you've got mail!" sound-bite became (in)famous because so many people were using AOL for their e-mail (whether they wanted to or not):

I guess you're a young one, aren't you? I still remember the days, long long ago, when I had to try and wrangle with machines that connected to the net via AOL. They generally controlled what you could reach on the net, mainly by imposing their own custom web browser and email service on you. They had their own news service, their own search engine, and their own forum boards. In short, they profited by using their control over your access to the network.

Really, all you need to know about how the Internet would function without net neutrality is to simply look at how large scale networking functioned in the days before the ARPA-designed "Internet" became the structure everyone used. Because there was no net neutrality at that time. People migrated away from systems like AOL because unfettered access to the universe of data available on the web was better.

EDIT: You've probably never heard this little snippet, but at one time the AOL "you've got mail!" sound-bite became (in)famous because so many people were using AOL for their e-mail (whether they wanted to or not):

I was using the internet in the days of AOL right in in your backyard at UD in the mid 90’s .
[doublepost=1511473327][/doublepost]

I was using the internet in the days of AOL right in in your backyard at UD in the mid 90’s .

 

[blackfox]

To point of the argument- hard to argue that "Net Neutrality" is bad for anyone. Or, that lack thereof is an improvement.

 

[Hitrate]

[QUOTE="Glockworkorange
Yep. You guys sound JUST like Alex Jones. LOL.[/QUOTE]

Walks like a sheep, talks like a sheep.... It really is amusing how you blind people have no comeback other than further revealing your ignorance and cognitive dissonance.

 

[barmann]

Wouldn’t ending net neutrality cause isp to compete?

Today, ISPs compete by charging a certain amount of money for a certain amount of speed, reliability, service, availability, additional offerings like media streaming and a pretty pink tarp for that rusty truck on your front yard.

Without net neutrality, ISPs will charge you the same , but will also have some control the over content that reaches you.

Bad news - no free pink tarps anymore; good news, a lot of pink tarps will be on offer when you surf the net .
They will be more expensive than ever before - as pink tarp makers will have to pay your ISP to get through to you - but that's a small price to pay for highest bidder's freedom !

 

[VulchR]

Today, ISPs compete by charging a certain amount of money for a certain amount of speed, reliability, service, availability, additional offerings like media streaming and a pretty pink tarp for that rusty truck on your front yard.

Without net neutrality, ISPs will charge you the same , but will also have some control the over content that reaches you.

Bad news - no free pink tarps anymore; good news, a lot of pink tarps will be on offer when you surf the net .
They will be more expensive than ever before - as pink tarp makers will have to pay your ISP to get through to you - but that's a small price to pay for highest bidder's freedom !

You are assuming a competitive market will evolve, but suppose there are monopolistic practices or simply only one ISP in a given (probably rural) region? Freedom is an illusion if you have only one choice, and wouldn't it be nice if for once our politicians considered the needs of the people at the bottom of the pile rather than those who can always afford to be the highest bidder?

 

[Glockworkorange]

[QUOTE="Glockworkorange
Yep. You guys sound JUST like Alex Jones. LOL.

Walks like a sheep, talks like a sheep.... It really is amusing how you blind people have no comeback other than further revealing your ignorance and cognitive dissonance.[/QUOTE]
It's simply that I don't believe in governmental regulations when there is no obvious problem that needs to be fixed.

• I saw what the IRS did to tea party groups. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/25/trump-apologizes-irs-tea-party-targeting-faults-lo/
• I saw how the Obama administration bungled the Obama Care web site: https://www.cnn.com/2013/10/21/opinion/carroll-obamacare-rollout-mess/index.html.
• I saw how George W Bush's government somehow misplaced trillions of dollars: http://salem-news.com/articles/may012013/rumsfeld-trillions-tk.php
• I saw how the government loves spying on us: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

I see governmental incompetence and sometimes outright malice all over the place, left, right and independent.

I am not certain why anyone wants that same governmental leviathan in control of the internet. Make no mistake---when Washington gains the power to regulate something, they gain the power to run and rule it.

I suspect it's because some of you have been brainwashed and feel corporations are "evil" and somehow see the government as a virtuous and benign entity, worthy of trust. This is especially true for all of you who cannot stand Donald Trump. Do you want to give his Executive Branch the power to control the internet? Because that is what you are asking for.

I personally fear the United States government and it's unlimited resources more than freaking Comcast.

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

 

[AsherN]

It's simply that I don't believe in governmental regulations when there is no obvious problem that needs to be fixed.


I personally fear the United States government and it's unlimited resources more than freaking Comcast.

How onerous is a regulation that tells ISP "Don't do **** with the traffic"?

 

[Glockworkorange]

How onerous is a regulation that tells ISP "Don't do **** with the traffic"?

It always starts simple.

Then it grows and sinks it's tentacles in. This is how government works. It metastasizes and stifles.

Hey, if there were a big problem that needed to be fixed, perhaps my opinion would be different.

But whatever. Net neutrality is going to get the ax. It's absolutely going to happen. It was part of Trump's campaign---kill excessive regulation.

All the hand wringing and teeth gnashing is not going to stop anything. Go out and get some fresh air. On to the next fight....

 

[pat500000]

3 fcc members wants it gone...it’s gone.

 

[VulchR]

It always starts simple.

Then it grows and sinks it's tentacles in. This is how government works. It metastasizes and stifles.

Hey, if there were a big problem that needed to be fixed, perhaps my opinion would be different.

But whatever. Net neutrality is going to get the ax. It's absolutely going to happen. It was part of Trump's campaign---kill excessive regulation.

All the hand wringing and teeth gnashing is not going to stop anything. Go out and get some fresh air. On to the next fight....

You know, you have everything you need to change the government. You can vote. You can petition. You can lobby. You can protest. Acting paranoid about the government, like it is out of your control, doesn't really make a lot of sense if you're in the US. You should consider the experiences of people in countries in which the government is a genuine problem to life and liberty.

Trump will get this through the FCC so that he can make robber-barons great again. Then, we'll see what happens at the next election.

 

[koulmj]

F*** everyone at the FCC

 

[tgara]

Apparently he wasn't born back when the airlines were deregulated, as that completely killed Eastern and Braniff. Braniff completely went belly up thanks to deregulation. Definitely drinking the Kool-aid - among other things - here.

BL.

Wrong. Prior to deregulation in the 1980s you couldn’t find a coast-to-coast flight for <$1000 and now, thanks to deregulation you can find cheap fares on a variety of airlines.

And when was the last time you looked at your phone bill? Before deregulation AT&T was charging $0.45/minute for cell phone calls and $1+/minute for overseas calls. After regulation, long distance charges are practically zero and international charges largely non-existent thanks to Skype, WhatsApp and other apps that were created in the deregulated environment.

Or utilities. Prior to deregulation you had no choice, much like the old telephone monopoly days. Ask the folks living in Texas what happened following deregulation of their power market. Prices have dropped like a rock thanks to the competitive market.

Is that fruit punch or lemon lime Kool aid you are drinking?

 

[bradl]

Wrong. Prior to deregulation in the 1980s you couldn’t find a coast-to-coast flight for <$1000 and now, thanks to deregulation you can find cheap fares on a variety of airlines.

And when was the last time you looked at your phone bill? Before deregulation AT&T was charging $0.45/minute for cell phone calls and $1+/minute for overseas calls. After regulation, long distance charges are practically zero and international charges largely non-existent thanks to Skype, WhatsApp and other apps that were created in the deregulated environment.

Or utilities. Prior to deregulation you had no choice, much like the old telephone monopoly days. Ask the folks living in Texas what happened following deregulation of their power market. Prices have dropped like a rock thanks to the competitive market.

Is that fruit punch or lemon lime Kool aid you are drinking?

From the AP/UPI:

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1983/1...ntinental-files-for-bankruptcy/9993435038400/

Airline deregulation: Braniff goes out of business; Continental files for bankruptcy

By BRUCE NICHOLS | Oct. 15, 1983

HOUSTON -- Braniff International's May 1982 shutdown demonstrated the airline industry was in big trouble after deregulation. And Continental Airlines' Sept. 24 bankruptcy filing showed one man's idea of the way out.

Braniff -- hurt by high fuel and labor costs, fare wars and too rapid expansion after Congress passed airline deregulation in 1978 - kept flying until it was totally out of cash. In the end, shutdown was its only alternative.


Continental Chairman Frank Lorenzo filed for Chapter 11 reorganization before he was out of money. At the time of filing, Continental still had a positive assets-to-debts ratio and $50 million in cash.

Lorenzo's move has stirred criticism in some circles. Unless some court intervenes, Continental has unilaterally canceled union contracts to cut his work force by two-thirds, cut pay in half and impose longer work hours.

Top pilot pay fell from $87,000 with benefits to $43,000, and pilots were asked to fly 85 hours a month instead of the previous average of 51. Top flight attendant pay dropped from $28,000 to $15,000, with similar work time increases.

President President Henry Duffy of the Air Line Pilots Association said employees had offered Continental every concession needed to keep flying -- pilots gave $100 million in late 1982 -- and charged Continental with duplicitous 'union-busting.'

Lorenzo said his goal never was to break the unions, but that they did not respond fully or quickly enough to his calls for more cost reductions in 1983. He said deregulation made cost-cutting necessary.

Lorenzo said even though Continental still had enough money to keep flying it would have run out of operating funds in a few weeks in the absence of drastic measures.

Although Continental lost $84 million the first half of the year, raising its total losses since deregulation to nearly $500 million, part of the problem was the unions' lack of trust in Lorenzo, who some pilots called a 'liar.'

Observers suggest Lorenzo's dramatic move helped Eastern Airlines Chairman Frank Borman win a commitment from his unions to work harder toward cutting labor costs. Borman had threatened to follow Continental into bankruptcy court.

The move certainly increased ALPA's call for Congressional modification of deregulation.

After filing for Chapter 11 reorganization, Continental shut down for two days, then resumed flying Sept. 27 to one-third of its former 78-city U.S. schedule at fares of $49 on any non-stop U.S. flight the first four days.

Continental, which called back 4,200 of its former 12,000 workers, kept all except two international routes. Since Oct. 1, it has offered $75 fares on any non-stopdomestic leg.

Fares after Oct. 22 have not been announced. Lorenzo promises Continental will be offering full, major airline service at bargain prices, but it is important for him to convince travel agents Continental will survive.

ALPA and the Union of Flight attendants waited one week after Continental's bankruptcy filing, then went on strike Oct. 1 protesting alleged compromises of safety and abuse of the bankruptcy law to break unions.

The 8,000 employees laid off, many of them married couples, were left to find other jobs or file for unemployment. Hicks said despite the personal tragedies of layoffs, Continental still could employ 4,200 workers.

Continental kept flying with pilots and flight attendants willing to cross picket lines. Continental said it was on firm legal ground and had not compromised safety.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge R.F. Wheless is expected to consider the union-busting allegation. Federal Aviation Administration monitors are watching the safety aspect.

Despite Continental's initial claims of having 600 of its former force of 1,400 pilots willing to fly, the strike forced cancellation of enough flights to cause Continental to reduce its schedule by another 8 percent Oct. 6.

Continental then turned to hiring outside pilots to fill its cockpits, going to 11 cities where other airlines have headquarters to take advantage of existing furlough lists in the depressed industry.

There's more.

https://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/america-by-air/online/jetage/jetage13.cfm

And Wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, during the deregulation, labor disputes and high debt loads strained the company under the leadership of former astronaut Frank Borman. Frank Lorenzo acquired Eastern in 1985 and moved many of its assets to his other airlines, including Continental Airlines and Texas Air. After continued labor disputes and a crippling strike in 1989, Eastern ran out of money and was liquidated in 1991.
.
.
.
Eastern began losing money as it faced competition from no-frills airlines, such as People Express, which offered lower fares. In an attempt to differentiate itself from its bargain competitors, Eastern began a marketing campaign stressing its quality of service and its rank of highly experienced pilots.

As a result of the strike, weakened airline structure, high fuel prices, inability to compete after deregulation and other financial problems, Eastern filed for bankruptcy protection on March 9, 1989.[22] This allowed Lorenzo to continue operating the airline with non-union employees. When control of the airline was taken away from Lorenzo by the courts and given to Marty Shugrue, it continued operations in an attempt to correct its cash flow, but to no avail.[23]

The airline stopped flying at midnight Saturday, January 19, 1991. On the previous evening company agents, unaware of the decision, continued to take reservations and told callers that the airline was not closing. Following the announcement, 5,000 of the 18,000 employees immediately lost their jobs. Of the remaining employees, reservation agents were told to report to work at their regular times, while other employees were told not to report to work unless asked to do so.[24] The Eastern shutdown eliminated many airline industry jobs in the Miami and New York City areas.[25]

Now.. want to explain to me again how deregulation didn't kill off Braniff and Eastern?

BL.

 

[tgara]

Now.. want to explain to me again how deregulation didn't kill off Braniff and Eastern?

BL.

Want to explain to me where I said it did?

 

[bradl]

Want to explain to me where I said it did?

You claimed that I was wrong. Prove me wrong, please. Where is your sources and citations that prove me wrong?

BL.

 

[Huntn]

Outstanding discussion this morning on NPR about net neutrality. I learned that back around the turn of the century 2000 and the 1990s, we had FCC rules in place that required large ISPs to open their networks to new comers and that as a nation people had many more choices in ISPs than they do (1, maybe 2) today. I don't remember that honestly, but not saying it was not so. Europe still has those rules.

If net neutrality is flushed, it means that all companies will have to negotiate with the ISPs for access, ALL COMPANIES. ie will pay the ISPs for the right to be on the top tier, and the result is that the large profitable companies like Amazon and Google will pop up first, but startups and smaller companies will be restricted on a secondary or lower tier. This is a clear case where regulations maintain a democracy in the market place. We do want that right??

From the OP, this is the typical BS name you get from the business oriented: Restoring Internet Freedom order, when it includes a solid FU to citizens. Are you fooled?

 

[koulmj]

I am not fooled in thinking that its no one’s business where I take my data. Unless of chorse I am committing a crime. Amazon, Hulu, BattleFront 2, whatever. I dont want companies to know. Or NEED to know what I am doing with data brcause then they control me.

 

[bmac4]

This is going to destroy the internet in the US as we know it. This will become what cable has become, you get packages of internet. You can either stream Netflix and Amazon and not Hulu, or you can get Hulu and not Netflix for the base price, or pay for the premium and get it all. This is ridiculous, and the fact that anyone supports axing net neutrality is crazy.

 

[samcraig]

No thanks.