The plan to kill Net Neutrality

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jpietrzak8, Apr 27, 2017.

  1. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #1
    Hey, the official plan to turn the Internet into an "information service" (ala cable TV) has just been released:

    http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0427/DOC-344614A1.pdf

    Lots of legalese in there, but the Verge has a good article up on the document. Some quotes:

    Rather than undoing the net neutrality order wholesale, the FCC is essentially splitting it up into two parts: one part undoes the legal authority used to implement net neutrality — a classification known as “Title II” — and the other part asks whether or not it should keep the rules, like no blocking or throttling websites, that were implemented.

    ...

    The possibilities range wildly. At the most lenient, the FCC could choose to do nothing and implement no net neutrality protections at all. That’s a real possibility, as the commission seems pretty skeptical that internet providers could actually do anything to harm consumers or web companies.

    In its draft proposal, the commission says there is “virtually no quantifiable evidence of consumer harm,” then goes on to ask questions like: has anything actually gone wrong? Are codified rules even necessary? And, “when is ‘throttling’ harmful to consumers?”​

    http://www.theverge.com/2017/4/27/15456472/fcc-reveals-net-neutrality-killing-proposal

    So yeah, enjoy your net while you've got it. We're all about to be defined-down from people communicating over the net to simply people "consuming" it. :(
     
  2. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #2
    it's cool. I don't get charged data fees for streaming stuff on my ATT phone. <ducks>
     
  3. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #3
    That sucks for you guys. I was hoping you lot were going to catch up to us (re ISP's and socially) in Europe. Everyone needs unlimited bandwidth 80mbps home connections.
     
  4. HDFan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    #4
    And T-Mobile doesn't count streaming from selected video sites. Comcast doesn't charge for their video service.

    But what happens when Comcast decides that they want to promote their over the top service, and start throttling Netflix? It happened, and Netflix was required to pay them for interconnect fees. If the service you use isn't charged it's great for you, but what happens if you stream from a site they don't support?

    I am surprised that more people at MacRumors don't see this as a very significant threat to the innovation and creativity that we see in the applications and services that we use. If you are concerned about it you should file an official comment with the FCC. Here are instructions from TechCrunch:

    https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/27/how-to-comment-on-the-fccs-proposal-to-revoke-net-neutrality/

    Here's what I said, with a few changes:

    The internet is a utility, just as important now to the public as gas, electric and water. We have already seen large providers, such as Comcast, AT&T and T-Mobile remove data caps for their own services. If internet neutrality is revoked what is going to keep these providers from slowing down services from competitors? We have already seen this happen with Comcast, where Netflix speeds were reduced (of course Comcast denied they were doing it) until they worked out extra fees. Comcast also denied that their customer service was terrible, until Consumer reports published data pointing out that it wasn't true. Comcast cannot be trusted.

    We have seen how competition between cellular companies has been a huge benefit to consumers. Verizon stated that they would never offer an unlimited plan again, until T-Mobile introduced one. Customer's had to pay for data they did not use, until T-Mobile started rolling over data, so now AT&T and Verizon do the same. But they do it grudgingly.

    DirecTV was an incredible service, which had great support. But now that AT&T has taken them over when you call for support you get someone who doesn't have a clue about the equipment or how to use it. On a recent call they said that they had to send out a technician. When the technical arrived all he had to do was plug in a power plug.

    Large companies who have a guaranteed customer base don't worry about the fact that their customers would do anything to go to a competitor. They need understand that they have to innovate and to satisfy their customers. Internet neutrality keeps that pressure on by giving them competition.

    Small companies, such as Tidal and Vox may find that some of their products no longer work. Both provide very high quality audio streaming which requires high bitrate and data caps. If Comcast decides that it wants to promote its own music offering, they can just throttle these companies bandwidth and they are dead. This is not "internet freedom", it is the no-holds bared capitalism of the 1800's.

    These large companies (Comcast, AT&T. Verizon) are not innovators. It is the small companies which are doing the innovations and generating new jobs at the same time. By eliminating the proposal to allow consumers to purchase mass market cable modems you have already cost the consumers of this country hundreds of dollars, giving this money to corporations who can survive very well without this income. For those on limited means this amount of money, although small, could make a major difference.

    Don't make the same mistake again by ignoring the basic tenets of competition and consumer needs. Please reject this proposal.
     
  5. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #5
    Just to be clear, I was being facetious...
     

Share This Page