Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
In sum total, don't expect a final legal ruling on Net Neutrality until (potentially) some 20-plus private and state government lawsuits wind their way through the court system. We may be talking late fall 2018 for such a ruling from the US Supreme Court.
 
You think DSL is good enough for video streaming but not for SSH? :)

DSL is broadband, though. We get almost 1-2Mb on DSL here, on a good day with nobody else on (I mean in the area). So our choice, if you can call it that, is 100Mb+ Spectrum or 1-2Mb DSL.

This may be the “be careful what you ask for” problem. People love to slam their cable providers while ignoring the infinitely greater value they provide over the actual utility.

It’s also interesting and perhaps only coincidental that my cable provider was unlimited prior to NN but set a cap last year. As a consumer, I always feel like I’m fighting for scraps, regardless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kilimanjaro
Its severely unfair for a low bandwidth user (emails, browsing, social media) to subsidize the usage of a high bandwidth user (youtube, torrents, gaming, netflix).

Low bandwidth users can buy a lower cost package that has lower speed and a data cap.
 
China is a bastion of internet freedom?

Of course not (and that's one of the many things they are doing right).

It's a civilized country, however, which is why you shouldn't speak ill of it.

What erudite country provides the sort of education that resulted in that bizarre screed?

Read on the left.

I can't but notice a hint of (completely inappropriate) sarcasm in your words, particularly in your use of "erudite".

If you want to prove a point, you can reply in my native language (seeing that I have a working knowledge of yours), in French or in Latin; my erudite country teaches either to high school kids.

I'll take Chinese too, if you are so inclined.

Only government can provide healthcare?

No, only government can provide socialized healthcare, by definition.

You know, healthcare that homeless people can afford, healthcare from which no individual can profit, healthcare as a basic human right.

More generally, the only kind of healthcare that can be in a socialist society.

Government rations healthcare and makes dupes believe that they are getting a wonderful deal.

Deal?

1. Healthcare is a right, not a "deal".
2. I am not a dupe. As long as you have an American passport, you are not allowed to call me a dupe.
3. I have a chronic disease and I can't complain about the treatment I get - the best part is that while I was unemployed I could access the same exact treatment with a 0-day wait list. But hey, government lies.
 
China is a bastion of internet freedom? Been there many times. No thanks.
[doublepost=1513449788][/doublepost]

Please. This is yet another example of the sky is falling rhetoric. It’s childish but common. Really need to turn off CNN and study civics, the founding and the Constitution.
[doublepost=1513450124][/doublepost]

No it isn’t. Netflix and YouTube suck up far more bandwidth than other users. The answer is more supply, not bogging down what we have now.

Apple for example, is piling up services that require bandwidth. It doesn’t work in airports or on college campus where everyone is streaming useless data. It’s getting worse and worse. I’d like to see content sellers start massive funding for infrastructure before it comes to a grinding halt.
Not exactly sure what you're trying to say. The fact is that Trumps administration did do what they have said they did and it's a clear violation of the freedom of speech in science. He is going after enemies of his within the government, using third parties to hunt them down. All you seem to be able to do is accuse people of watching cable news, (something I haven't done in the best part of a decade). Looks like you're letting your emotions get the best of you. Trump and his cohorts are the enemy of every freedom loving and liberty minded individual around. He, and his evangelical backers and masters are bad for our way of governance. Not sure why you're defending him, you sound like a libertarian most of the time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Solomani
HRC was a corrupt piece of ****. Sure maybe NN would have survived but she didn’t deserve the presidency either. I pray the American people wake up and demand quality, honest, hard working, proven candidates who have shown through action they care about the American people above all else in future elections. No more of this well they suck but they are on team so I’ll vote for them.
Corrupt to the point where we would lose the respect of the entire world, lose internet freedom and watch the government have a war on the free press?

...ok then
[doublepost=1513472933][/doublepost]
Will this administration do anything that isn't dumber than a box of rocks?
Box of rocks for president 2020
 
The conversations here would probably take more time to deteriorate, if words like "Republican" and "Democrat" where banned, forcing people to use more intelligent arguments than "your side sucks". Partisan arguments are irrelevant. We have a single party system, masquerading as a bipartisan system. The talking heads in Congress on both sides agree on far more than they would like you to think. True honest discussion can only come from people willing to put down their silly partisan banners, and use their heads.
[doublepost=1513478797][/doublepost]
Corrupt to the point where we would lose the respect of the entire world, lose internet freedom and watch the government have a war on the free press?

...ok then
[doublepost=1513472933][/doublepost]
Box of rocks for president 2020
I suggest you educate yourself. The risks of a Clinton presidency have been discussed ad nauseam, by people far more intelligent than either of us. Trump was a terrible candidate, but the fear of another Clinton presidency is really what drove people to the polls more than anything Trump ever did.
 
Apple for example, is piling up services that require bandwidth. It doesn’t work in airports or on college campus where everyone is streaming useless data. It’s getting worse and worse. I’d like to see content sellers start massive funding for infrastructure before it comes to a grinding halt.

Well, yes. But our progressive know nothing friends will complain that that might involve increased costs. But they will also complain that service is slow, equipment fails, and outage occur because ISPs have not made investments in new technology or equipment. Can't have it both ways.

CNN wen't from being near center to going far left after the election. I can't watch that or Fox anymore. We seriously need an unbiased news network, I just wanna know what's going on, I don't care what the reporter thinks...

Try CSPAN.

The lawsuit filed by the 18 Attorneys General will go nowhere.

Right, for two reasons.

(1) Court challenges of an agency rule are made under the standard of "arbitrary or capricious", and courts are largely reluctant to overturn such agency decisions because they lack the expertise to evaluate the decisions. In addition, Pai has developed a clear factual basis for the regulation change and presided over a much more transparent process than his predecessor did in 2015. He released the draft order for public review three weeks before the vote. In 2015, then-Chairman Tom Wheeler did not make the order public until after the final vote, which tilted pre-vote public discourse in favor of those who had received leaked copies of the order. Picking winners and losers indeed. By comparison, the public debate since Thanksgiving has been by turns substantive and raucous, but at least it was conducted on a level playing field for information. Lastly, the Supreme Court has consistently said for more than 30 years that a change of administration is sufficient reason for an agency to change between otherwise permissible policy interpretations. Court cases are going nowhere is right.

(2) The progressives might want to try subjecting the new regs to the Congressional Review Act, but this will be a tough road. It would have to make it through Congress, and be signed by the President, which he won't do.

If anything is going to happen, Congress has to do it. They really need to update the Communications Act. It was last updated in 1996, when half of America lacked internet access and the half that did mostly accessed the internet via dial-up. The act’s confusing and outdated language is largely to blame for the perpetual ping-pong matches at the FCC regarding broadband regulation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GuruZac and webbuzz
Well, yes. But our progressive know nothing friends will complain that that might involve increased costs. But they will also complain that service is slow, equipment fails, and outage occur because ISPs have not made investments in new technology or equipment. Can't have it both ways.

The cost is already too high for their service, and yes it’s slow. You should be able to buy your own cable box, a forced lease on equipment is stupid. The bills are riddled with garbage, they telemarket relentlessly to their own customers, and I have no choice because Comcast is the sole provider of cable and I cable internet in my market.

This is just a way for Trump to roll back an Obama-era regulation. If Obama had endorsed Trump, he’d resign.
 
The cost is already too high for their service, and yes it’s slow. You should be able to buy your own cable box, a forced lease on equipment is stupid. The bills are riddled with garbage, they telemarket relentlessly to their own customers, and I have no choice because Comcast is the sole provider of cable and I cable internet in my market.

I hear you, but many of those charges are due to state, local, and federal regulations that net neutrality doesn't address. So many extra fees, taxes, and surcharges, it adds up to a significant percentage of the total bill. What the heck is a Right of Way fee?? Federal Universal Service Charge? FCC Access Charge? Look at the new Apple Watch Series 3 with LTE. Even though the watch's cellular service is associated with your mobile phone number, the government considers it an "additional line" and as such adds all the taxes and fees. It raises a $10 charge to about $18 after all that stuff is added in! Crazy!

As for equipment, that blows. My carrier, Cox, lets me buy my own cable box and router if I want, and I don't get any marketing calls at all (but I do get offers via snail mail). They are always around in their trucks upgrading our local services too. Overall they are pretty good and I like them. Do you know if local laws are preventing another cable company from coming into your area?
 
I hear you, but many of those charges are due to state, local, and federal regulations that net neutrality doesn't address. So many extra fees, taxes, and surcharges, it adds up to a significant percentage of the total bill. What the heck is a Right of Way fee?? Federal Universal Service Charge? FCC Access Charge? Look at the new Apple Watch Series 3 with LTE. Even though the watch's cellular service is associated with your mobile phone number, the government considers it an "additional line" and as such adds all the taxes and fees. It raises a $10 charge to about $18 after all that stuff is added in! Crazy!

As for equipment, that blows. My carrier, Cox, lets me buy my own cable box and router if I want, and I don't get any marketing calls at all (but I do get offers via snail mail). They are always around in their trucks upgrading our local services too. Overall they are pretty good and I like them. Do you know if local laws are preventing another cable company from coming into your area?

But Trump doesn’t care about this. Obama signed this? I’m going to sign the opposite. That’s his policy. So why, as someone intelligent, can think and reason, supports this, I don’t know.
 
But Trump doesn’t care about this. Obama signed this? I’m going to sign the opposite. That’s his policy. So why, as someone intelligent, can think and reason, supports this, I don’t know.

Hey, I don't like it either. But ultimately, it's a job for Congress. Congress needs to set the laws that the President and the FCC will follow. As I said before, the Communication Act needs serious updating. It's behind the times in terms of technology and the way people use the internet. Doing that will stop the enacting and repealing cycle which only brings uncertainty and frustration to everyone, including ISPs and their customers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kironin
Hey, I don't like it either. But ultimately, it's a job for Congress. Congress needs to set the laws that the President and the FCC will follow. As I said before, the Communication Act needs serious updating. It's behind the times in terms of technology and the way people use the internet. Doing that will stop the enacting and repealing cycle which only brings uncertainty and frustration to everyone, including ISPs and their customers.


Your first sentence was enough. The rest is defending the President, nothing else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huntn
Every individual county and state should fight against this by the one factor that will work - remove the monopoly factor. Allow, better ensure, two or more high speed ISPs everywhere, remove the archaic reasons most providers give for their reason to exist as single providers in any subdivision!

I want Comcast, Google and AT&T working in direct competition in my town. My local PSC (elected/nominated officials) are against this policy only because they are bribed very well by the lobbyists in various forms.

If implemented, and it doesn't work, USA does NOT work!
 
Hey, I don't like it either. But ultimately, it's a job for Congress. Congress needs to set the laws that the President and the FCC will follow. As I said before, the Communication Act needs serious updating. It's behind the times in terms of technology and the way people use the internet. Doing that will stop the enacting and repealing cycle which only brings uncertainty and frustration to everyone, including ISPs and their customers.
Con men can be so unpredictable, can’t they? :rolleyes: Congress is supposed to represent it’s citizens of which a vast majority was against removing net neutrality.
 
Because you didn't react with your wallet by changing providers when they (if they) will ever do that.
Interesting. I live in an apartment complex where I only have access to one ISP. If they start screwing with my internet, I’ll have to move in order to solve this issue. That sounds like fun.
 
Interesting. I live in an apartment complex where I only have access to one ISP. If they start screwing with my internet, I’ll have to move in order to solve this issue. That sounds like fun.
doesn't matter. ISPs are an oligopoly so they'll screw you at any address.
 
Interesting. I live in an apartment complex where I only have access to one ISP. If they start screwing with my internet, I’ll have to move in order to solve this issue. That sounds like fun.
doesn't matter. ISPs are an oligopoly so they'll screw you at any address.
Every individual county and state should fight against this by the one factor that will work - remove the monopoly factor. Allow, better ensure, two or more high speed ISPs everywhere, remove the archaic reasons most providers give for their reason to exist as single providers in any subdivision!

I want Comcast, Google, AT&T and others working in direct competition in my town. My local PSC (elected/nominated officials) are against this policy only because they are bribed very well by the lobbyists in various forms.

If implemented, and it doesn't work, USA does NOT work!

Grass-roots corruption needs to be tackled first.
 
Your first sentence was enough. The rest is defending the President, nothing else.

You turn everything into something about Trump. Sad. And irrational.

Con men can be so unpredictable, can’t they? :rolleyes: Congress is supposed to represent it’s citizens of which a vast majority was against removing net neutrality.

Which vast majority are you referring to? The vast majority of fake comments on the proposed rules?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/millio...-federal-regulations-many-are-fake-1513099188

Or maybe you mean people like these, you and your fellow progressive travelers? :rolleyes:

https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/syracuse-man-charged-threatening-kill-katko

https://www.wsj.com/article_email/w...53-lMyQjAxMTA3NzIyOTMyNTk2Wj/#comments_sector
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: webbuzz
You turn everything into something about Trump. Sad. And irrational.



Which vast majority are you referring to? The vast majority of fake comments on the proposed rules?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/millio...-federal-regulations-many-are-fake-1513099188

Or maybe you mean people like these, you and your fellow progressive travelers? :rolleyes:

https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/syracuse-man-charged-threatening-kill-katko

https://www.wsj.com/article_email/w...53-lMyQjAxMTA3NzIyOTMyNTk2Wj/#comments_sector
Of note, net neutrality is all about equality. :rolleyes: :oops: This is not to imply there were no fake submissions for net neutrality.

IT'S SUPER HARD TO FIND HUMANS IN THE FCC’S NET NEUTRALITY COMMENTS
Researchers at FiscalNote previously identified nearly one million comments as bot submissions, all of them opposing net neutrality.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.