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.
Net Neutrality Rules Officially End Today as Democrats 'Less Than 50 Votes' From Advancing Petition in the House
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Know the past to avoid repeating these mistakes.
[doublepost=1528728195][/doublepost]
Total BS.
Great counterarguments
You left me a lot to think about today
/s
Twitter censorship is the worst. I’d love to see them investigated, regulated, and dissected by scrutiny of the law as much as possible.
Jack Dorsey now apologizes to a check mark for ordering Chick Fil-A during pride month “forgot about their background” — as a Christian corporation. That is, When he isn’t linking to articles that call for having all conservatives in California eradicated.. and later his to clarify what he meant by calling it a ‘great read’
Cant make this stuff up look at his feed. unfit to be CEO of a company of personal expression
Things have gotten unbelievably ugly,
instagram is censoring people who use the words God, Trump, or USA too. Look it up.
The internet utopia you speak of in its current form, simply doesn’t exist. Unless you’re into that kinda stuff, which you may be.
Last edited:
We can only thank Republicans and Trumpsters for the end of Net Neutrality. It will take time to see the results but just wait when the bill arrives. I’m sure many will regret it.
This is exactly right. What we'll see in the short term is nothing at all. This gives the non-neutrality advocates opportunity to argue that the pro-neutrality concerns were unfounded. Then, ISPs will make deals that introduce tiered services. Key to these, at least at first, will be to make one tier of every service very attractive and popular. The ISPs will then use this to argue that returning to neutrality will involve losing that very popular tiered service. Once that hurdle is overcome, ISPs can begin to more aggressively structure services to improve their revenue. At this point, the moves will no longer be even colorably pro-consumer, but consumers won't have a choice.
Note that the above works hand-in-hand with efforts by many in government to weaken traditional antitrust enforcement. The idea is to consolidate wealth in a small number of very large players, who have an interest in the process and lobbyists/contributions to support their position.
In short, even "trying out" non-neutrality is a very bad idea. Consumers should want the internet to be regulated. These shouldn't be crippling regulations, obviously, but there should be enough regulation in place to ensure neutrality and reasonably low impediments to access.
Eh, I don't think it's that big a deal and have made an animated GIF explaining my feelings on this topic:
That 3D animation took forever!
That 3D animation took forever!
Apparently lots of us have forgotten the throttling issues and the selective pricing that led to the net neutrality rules in the first place.
It is difficult for me to understand at times why people would vote for things that adversely affect them just to stay in line with your political point of view.
It is difficult for me to understand at times why people would vote for things that adversely affect them just to stay in line with your political point of view.
But this is hypothetical as of now.
The pay-per-access concept
Until we see it in practice, the screeching is unwarranted imo
—
The counter argument is this will force competition to start stepping their game up, and we know what competition means for consumers
If one ISP starts toying with customers, they’ll leap to the other that dont do this
And the counter argument to that is, when one does one thing, the others follow suit. Look at cell phone carriers.
Yet they aren’t subject to non-net neutrality and still find a way to hose their customers
...So which end is up? I maintain we do not know,
Yep, working fine. Like how Facetime was working fine on AT&T. Great even, a positive working, not blocked in anyway experience.
Exactly. I'm so glad we had non-biased honest reporting from the left letting us know how much Facebook and MySpace were going to charge us each month to access their content. I paid MacRumors my fee, glad I got a discount for paying for the year.
Democrats are:
- Less than 50 votes from advancing it in the House
- Less than 51 votes from advancing it in the Senate
- Less than 1 vote from advancing it in the White House
You mean like when ATT blocked FaceTime on our phones and they charged an extra fee!?
Except you didn't lose out on any "freedom" when net neutrality went away today. You're still just as free as you were yesterday, or back before "net neutrality" started in 2015. Also, there is no "right" to a open and free internet, unpolluted air, food, etc. You can want or demand those things, but they are not a fundamental human right.
This wasn't happening before 2015, there are no incentives for it to happen now. Regional monopoly carriers in various small (and sometimes large) municipalities have show a documented history of rabidly defending their turf. Both legally and extra-legally. Actively preventing such startup competition from even getting started.
If Anti-NN folks want to see this magical competition materialize in rural markets they'll need pass regulations and possibly incentives to help grow that competition.
There's no reason to write these what-if laws. The internet was perfectly fine pre-net neutrality. It's just another example of gov't overreach.
You mean like when you could have switched to another carrier that didn't do that? And also you mean when the FCC made AT&T stop doing that, before any net neutrality regulations?
No it wasn't!
I posted a couple of examples from the days BB was not as widespread.
You can research yourself and see how much ISPs got away with violating us in the past before lawsuits and political action reined them in - though not enough.
[doublepost=1528729627][/doublepost]
Wrong - it did happen. Search a little or read some of the links posted of the past misdeeds.
...said Ajit Pai, former Verizon executive, promising that he truly has the consumers’ best interests at heart.
The FCC had NN regulations on this actually, FaceTime was built-in and not user downloadable therefore making it acceptable by the FCC's own regulations to block it. Welcome to loopholes
From 2012: https://www.cultofmac.com/186208/at...ck-it-and-theres-nothing-you-can-do-about-it/
Last edited:
If you support net hostility among ISPs who will be able to charge you more for viewing anything they wish online then congrats, you win today and I hope you live in a Comcast-only zone where you'll likely be the first to experience your victory first-hand.
If you support net neutrality among ISPs and think they should be even-handed in delivering you online content—much like your electric company doesn't charge your more for powering your TV vs. your fridge or push you towards "Power Plan Platinum" where you get to connect your air conditioner, then today is a sad day for you.
These companies will not upset consumers over night. They have entire marketing teams and consultants which understand human psychology and over the course of 5-10 years, 90% of the population won't even notice their bills going up and their favorite services are being degraded. If they do this properly, they'll do it right under our noses just as they were starting to before these regulations went into effect and people will eventually pivot to their ISP's streaming services because the picture quality is better or they don't have to wait as long for it to load.
Look up your representatives who refused to overturn this ruling and vote them out this November and again two years from now. Only you have the power to make a change. Don't put your stock in any one man, woman or party. Hold your representatives accountable and talk to them about what you think is important and explain why. Many of these representatives have no idea how technology works. Dumb it down if you have to but do not sugar coat it or mince words.
If you support net neutrality among ISPs and think they should be even-handed in delivering you online content—much like your electric company doesn't charge your more for powering your TV vs. your fridge or push you towards "Power Plan Platinum" where you get to connect your air conditioner, then today is a sad day for you.
These companies will not upset consumers over night. They have entire marketing teams and consultants which understand human psychology and over the course of 5-10 years, 90% of the population won't even notice their bills going up and their favorite services are being degraded. If they do this properly, they'll do it right under our noses just as they were starting to before these regulations went into effect and people will eventually pivot to their ISP's streaming services because the picture quality is better or they don't have to wait as long for it to load.
Look up your representatives who refused to overturn this ruling and vote them out this November and again two years from now. Only you have the power to make a change. Don't put your stock in any one man, woman or party. Hold your representatives accountable and talk to them about what you think is important and explain why. Many of these representatives have no idea how technology works. Dumb it down if you have to but do not sugar coat it or mince words.
And you mean like how the FCC can no longer make AT&T stop if they do it again? The rules that allowed the FCC to enforce Net Neutrality on AT&T that time were struck down in court with FCC vs Verizon. Which is why the shift happened in 2015. Now the FCC has 0 tools, and (under Ajit Pai) 0 interest in ever doing again. If AT&T wanted to block FaceTime in the next hour, they can.
They won't, yet. I expect most of the major scum-bag carriers that were pulling anti-consumer tactics pre-2015 will wait until the November election. If they started throttling and blocking now, any candidate who wanted a leg-up could take a Pro-NN stance. After November they'll be able to see if they have conservative top-cover for another 2 years. Then the "package plans" will start to roll out.