Net Neutrality Repeal Made Official With Entry Into Federal Register

[tevion5]

I cannot wait to vote blue in the midterms.

As a European looking over the ocean with despair on an almost daily basis, please.
[doublepost=1519325893][/doublepost]

Good. Net neutrality was unfair for businesses and didn't make sense for the consumer long term. It was anti-capitalism and would ultimately prevent businesses' growth and negatively affect the future of the internet.

If there's anything wrong with America, it's a dire lack of capitalism and policy priority for businesses over people. Every day I worry the USA is on the cusp of becoming an anarcho-communist dystopia.
[doublepost=1519326028][/doublepost]

I agree. People complain when they don't get everything for free.

Americans seem to complain when they don't have to pay for something. Only funny enough it's usually the ones with more money.

 

[0007776]

All because some government, probably local elected to limit your ISP choices. Easily resolvable with the same method you prefer, elect different local government officials. You already have the solution you want in this case. You need to ask why is it not working? And the honest answer is NOT more of the same. It does not work because the government does not do what people want except in the extreme cases. Otherwise the local government in your example would allow competition. There are no unaccountable business, unless they are made by government allowing a monopoly.

For where I live it wasn’t the local governments decision to have a monopoly, it was the fact that it costs a massive amount of money to build the infrastructure so only one company could afford it. Hopefully we will soon get competition since there is a new undersea cable that comes on shore in my town, but so far the main ISP isn’t buying capacity on it because they want to make their money back on their land based system.

 

[tkukoc]

Except that the internet has done just fine for the last 20 years without the gov, so we don't need any of this crisis management that the government loves so much.

The government nor the people are the same as they were 20 years ago. A lot has changed.. and not for the better.

 

[AppleInLVX]

You are easy to bribe.

I think that's more of a buy than a bribe. And bought cheaply too. Seems that money is all that matters to some, including politicians. Is the idea that government should serve the people's best interest officially just a quaint notion now? From what I understand, NO ONE asked for this repeal except big businesses. In fact, more people acted to say this was what they DIDN'T want. The system is so broken I don't think people even know it's broken anymore. It's just "did I get a couple extra bucks to use for whatever I want to use it?" Myopic. Selfish.

 

[FattyMembrane]

Wait, how am I still reading this? I was told the internet would coast $1m/month and explode on itself if NN was repealed.

 

[AZ63]

Apple is just another business. They will do whatever that benefits them.

Also, why are you dragging Apple into this? They never said they were interested in ISP market.

Apple is a business. Like most businesses, if they don't make the consumer happy with their product or service, they fail to be a company long term.
I didn't "drag" Apple into this.
Apple inserted itself into this topic by submitting a letter in favor of Net Neutrality. I simply suggested that Apple has the financial means to become an ISP and when the mean corrupt businesses acting in a way that belies the interests of the public at large, Apple could make even more money by all the customers that would come flocking to their service. Why wouldn't they act like the other companies? Because they submitted a letter indicating the way the Net should function. This would give them a way to support their message to the government and the public at large.
A true win-win.

 

[aaronhead14]

What? You have two different thoughts there.

No. Restricting businesses prevents growth and healthy competition. Both of my thoughts go together.
[doublepost=1519330929][/doublepost]

Rubbish. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Yes I do. Bad policy doesn't help anybody long term. Net neutrality wouldn't give businesses any incentive to innovate or compete. For example, just look at how little growth we've seen from standard internet providers in the last few years compared to, say, cellular providers. When a company is anchored down by nonsensical government restrictions, said company becomes unable to grow. There's no incentive to do anything new. But a free market fixes the problem. When companies are allowed to compete and innovate without moronic restrictions, there's more competition, which gives the consumer more options, which incentivizes businesses to lower prices to fight for our loyalty. This is basic economics. The reason ISPs have sucked so much is because they haven't been permitted to grow like a healthy company. Now that some of those nonsensical restrictions have been lifted, we will start to see progress in home internet technology. We're going to start seeing more ISPs, more competition, and cheaper internet.

 

[AZ63]

Man the United States slant for this conversation is ridiculous. The Internet is global, it is bigger than the United States. "anti-capitalism" ... Yes, the Internet wasn't created to make money for corporations. The entire world doesn't subscribe to capitalism. If greed wasn't an issue in late stage capitalism, we wouldn't have Enron, banks "too big to fail", the entire Union movement, etc.

What?
Why ridiculous?
Net Neutrality affected the US not other countries. So it makes sense that the "slant" would be focused on the US. This whole issue of Net Neutrality is a US thing.
The rest of what you are talking about IS, off topic.

 

[splogue]

Here’s a fun fact: go research the prices of any services at any given point in history. Without singular exception, once government stepped in, prices went up. Every time.

Right. Like landline telephone service?

Stating something definitively doesn't actually make it true.

 

[jimothyGator]

Before reclassification, AT&T tried that BS with limiting FaceTime on iPhones to not be available unless you subscribed to certain tiered plans because they felt Net Neutrality only applied to downloaded apps and they could block and/or charge more for iPhone users to access iOS apps that came preinstalled.

https://www.theverge.com/2012/9/18/3351626/att-facetime-block-fcc-complaint-net-neutrality

And they reversed their policy after less than two months due to customer complaints. They didn’t wait until 2015.
[doublepost=1519334214][/doublepost]

Right. Like landline telephone service?

Stating something definitively doesn't actually make it true.

Until deregulation, there was virtually no innovation in telephone service. Regional telcos were legally protected from competion. Cable operators couldn’t offer home telephone service, and telephone operators couldn’t offer television service.

We paid by the minute for long distance calls! And hour long phone call could cost you $9 in 1980s money.

So yes, landline telephone service is an apt example.

 

[Glockworkorange]

I can’t believe this happening in America.

The horror!!! It’s literally almost as bad as the slave trade!

The internet as we know it is literally over!

Everyone breathe. We will all be fine.

The hysteria over this issue is astounding. What hyper partisan times we live in. (Head shake).
[doublepost=1519337687][/doublepost]

Unfortunately you appear to be the one who doesn’t know what it is. With Net Neutrality internet regulation rested in the government which was accountable to voters. Now that it has been repealed regulation is the responsibility of unelected unaccountable businesses. If you are lucky enough to live in an area with a lot of ISPS to choose from you likely will not see much of an impact. If you only have the choice of one or two you will end up paying much higher prices for the same thing or probably about the same for much less.

Net neutrality was the product of an unelected body of commissioners. None are accountable to “the people.” None received money from ISP’s because they are not elected and don’t run for office.

Lol.

 

[0007776]

Net neutrality was the product of an unelected body of commissioners. None are accountable to “the people.” None received money from ISP’s because they are not elected and don’t run for office.

They are political appointees, they may not be directly elected, but they definitely do answer to the voters a whole lot more than the heads of your local cable monopoly.

 

[AgentAnonymous]

The crooked Trump administration is only concerned about padding the pockets of billionaires like him who run the ISPs, so they can selectively throttle content and charge you extra. This repeal also allows ISPs to politically discriminate as well.

Vote blue in the midterms if you care about preserving internet freedom and privacy.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

I’ll sum up both sides:

“It’s the worst thing ever!”
“No, it isn’t.”

 

[magicschoolbus]

I think that's more of a buy than a bribe. And bought cheaply too. Seems that money is all that matters to some, including politicians. Is the idea that government should serve the people's best interest officially just a quaint notion now? From what I understand, NO ONE asked for this repeal except big businesses. In fact, more people acted to say this was what they DIDN'T want. The system is so broken I don't think people even know it's broken anymore. It's just "did I get a couple extra bucks to use for whatever I want to use it?" Myopic. Selfish.

Becuase I would rather the money going into my own pocket and my families pockets and my childrens college fund and my 401 K instead of giving it to programs for other people? It's my money to begin with. If anything, it's the government that's being selfish by taking my money.

 

[RealSkyDiver]

Good. Net neutrality was unfair for businesses and didn't make sense for the consumer long term. It was anti-capitalism and would ultimately prevent businesses' growth and negatively affect the future of the internet.

Nothing about that sentence madecremotely Spence Russian bot -.-

 

[NT1440]

Becuase I would rather the money going into my own pocket and my families pockets and my childrens college fund and my 401 K instead of giving it to programs for other people? It's my money to begin with. If anything, it's the government that's being selfish by taking my money.

Your bank account is backed by what again? You rugged individual you.

 

[EightyTwenty]

Yes the internet is still free and open. You just have to pay more for it. And the company controlling the freedom gets to decide if they feel you aren't paying enough whenever they like.

Seems great.

They can charge you whatever they want now. That doesn't change.

The misinformation regarding this issue is staggering. People have no earthly idea what they are talking about.
[doublepost=1519349085][/doublepost]

Your bank account is backed by what again? You rugged individual you.

Only 100K is backed by anything. He could lose every penny above that on any given day if the bank folds.

 

[smorrissey]

keep voting for the orange hair guy and his friends...

 

[EightyTwenty]

Nothing about that sentence madecremotely Spence Russian bot -.-

So everyone who disagrees with you ON ANY SUBJECT is a "Russian bot"?

You left wingers have lost your damn minds. You used to love Russia. Guess since they dropped communism and embraced Christianity, they became a natural enemy for the looney left.

 

[smorrissey]

The horror!!! It’s literally almost as bad as the slave trade!

The internet as we know it is literally over!

Just relax we'll sue.

 

[NT1440]

Only 100K is backed by anything. He could lose every penny above that on any given day if the bank folds.

So in a country where more than half are living paycheck to paycheck it’s negligible that THE GOVERNMENT backs savings up to that amount?

THAT was my point, the government ensures a (limited) protection of the money that poster was so cavalierly implied was all his...as if the protection of it via government wasn’t a thing.

I’m just getting real tired of the the “there’s no such thing as society” doctrine that has cemented itself into a sizeable chunk of the population.

 

[DeepIn2U]

What's happening?

Seriously, what is happening? What's changed since the reversal of Title II reclassification? What changed after Title II reclassification in 2015? I've heard all the hypotheticals. I want actuals. What's happening, and what has happened?

True ...

A hint for current "could" be carrier plans (ISP and cellular providers), anything changed for the worse?

Future ... you'll see it with AT&T 5G soon as trials begin late 2018. Then Verizon thereafter.

 

[jimothyGator]

Future ... you'll see it with AT&T 5G soon as trials begin late 2018. Then Verizon thereafter.

Yep, in a few years, most people in urban and suburban areas will have multiple choices for home broadband. Cable, DSL, and fiber offerings from Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, Google, etc. will compete against 5G from T-mobile, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, and regional carriers. It won’t be unusual to have three or four companies competing for your business. These worries of cable monopolies will seem silly in 5-10 years.

If anyone wants to take me up on a bet, here it is: five years from now, we’ll be paying less per Mbps than we do today.

 

[robbyx]

I cannot wait to vote blue in the midterms.

Same here. I’m so sick of politics and I don’t plan to follow any races or candidates, but I’ll definitely be voting all blue from now on. The Republican Party has descended into madness. I don’t care how intelligent a Republican candidate might be, not do I care how much I agree with him or her. The party is completely dead to me.