Net neutrality repealed!

[Millhouse]

A 3-2 vote along party lines in the FCC has repealed Net Neutrality passed under the Obama FCC.

This is big win for telecommunication companies that provide the internet, and a big loss for everyone else.

The FCC chairman who was appointed by Trump and once was an exec for Verizon years ago, said government shouldnt micromanage the internet. When in reality Net Neutrality prevented companies like Verizon, Comcast, AT&T from micromanaging the net.

This is a sad day for the internet in the U.S. Good job Trump, you ****.

"The approval of FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's proposal marks a victory for internet service providers like AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc and hands them power over what content consumers can access." - https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/us-federal-communications-commission-set-to-reverse-net-neutrality-rules/ar-BBGJMoz

[GMDino]

(12-14-2017, 03:41 PM)Millhouse Wrote: A 3-2 vote along party lines in the FCC has repealed Net Neutrality passed under the Obama FCC.

This is big win for telecommunication companies that provide the internet, and a big loss for everyone else.

The FCC chairman who was appointed by Trump and once was an exec for Verizon years ago, said government shouldnt micromanage the internet. When in reality Net Neutrality prevented companies like Verizon, Comcast, AT&T from micromanaging the net.

This is a sad day for the internet in the U.S. Good job Trump, you ****.

"The approval of FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's proposal marks a victory for internet service providers like AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc and hands them power over what content consumers can access." - https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/us-federal-communications-commission-set-to-reverse-net-neutrality-rules/ar-BBGJMoz

Elections have consequences.

Every rube upset about gay marriage and transgendered people in bathrooms, or with a misguided sense of why their boss hasn't given them a raise in five years brought this on themselves.  And the rest of us have to pay for it.

[hollodero]

So much winning for the little guy these days. Amazing.

[CKwi88]

Sucks. But hardly surprising.

But at least Hillary isn't the president.

[treee]

The good news is that this can (and will) be challenged in the courts by groups like the EFF (Electronics Frontier Foundation). It basically comes down to the fact that you can't just reverse FCC policy on a whim like Pai is trying to do. You actually have to provide a legitimate reason why this regulation is not needed. The fact that ISPs have shown for well over a decade now that they will throttle or completely block content that is against their business interests, will be a strong justification for the preservation of Net Neutrality in the courtroom.

[Millhouse]

(12-14-2017, 03:46 PM)GMDino Wrote: Elections have consequences.

Every rube upset about gay marriage and transgendered people in bathrooms, or with a misguided sense of why their boss hasn't given them a raise in five years brought this on themselves.  And the rest of us have to pay for it.

If there is one issue that can trigger the younger voters out there, it is this one. And this will have consequences on the Republicans come the next big elections, especially the President in 3 years. The 15, 16, 17 year olds, pretty much most of which use the net cant vote today. But when they hit 18, they wont forget this.

Now all that said, I am not too worried with my current provider Spectrum. I will be shocked if they try to create fast lanes and block or slow down content at their choosing (which they can only do if they disclose it to their customers). I dont remember this ever being an issue before 2015, so that is something there. But soon we will have Google in the area in a few years, and already have Cincy Bell fiber as a competitor. So any dick move by them will result in a cancellation, and make a switch probably. But I do feel bad for folks in areas that dont have competition.

[Dill]

(12-14-2017, 03:46 PM)GMDino Wrote: Elections have consequences.

Every rube upset about gay marriage and transgendered people in bathrooms, or with a misguided sense of why their boss hasn't given them a raise in five years brought this on themselves.  And the rest of us have to pay for it.

Dunno Dino, I already see a connection between the potential restrictions ahead and liberal, Hollywood elites trying to charge us more for entertainment.  A Republican Senate and House may not be enough to stop them.  We need to remove all the RINOs as well.

[GMDino]

(12-14-2017, 03:54 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Sucks. But hardly surprising.

But at least Hillary isn't the president.

Right?!?!  I mean...her emails! 

(12-14-2017, 03:55 PM)treee Wrote: The good news is that this can (and will) be challenged in the courts by groups like the EFF (Electronics Frontier Foundation). It basically comes down to the fact that you can't just reverse FCC policy on a whim like Pai is trying to do. You actually have to provide a legitimate reason why this regulation is not needed. The fact that ISPs have shown for well over a decade now that they will throttle or completely block content that is against their business interests, will be a strong justification for the preservation of Net Neutrality in the courtroom.

And all of those things make it even more unbelievable that they did it anyway.  Especially when the vast majority of citizens do not want them to do it.

(12-14-2017, 03:58 PM)Millhouse Wrote: If there is one issue that can trigger the younger voters out there, it is this one. And this will have consequences on the Republicans come the next big elections, especially the President in 3 years. The 15, 16, 17 year olds, pretty much most of which use the net cant vote today. But when they hit 18, they wont forget this.

Now all that said, I am not too worried with my current provider Spectrum. I will be shocked if they try to create fast lanes and block or slow down content at their choosing (which they can only do if they disclose it to their customers). I dont remember this ever being an issue before 2015, so that is something there. But soon we will have Google in the area in a few years, and already have Cincy Bell fiber as a competitor. So any dick move by them will result in a cancellation, and make a switch probably. But I do feel bad for folks in areas that dont have competition.

Will they remember?  I hope so, but the current electorate seems to have a too short memory for these things.  Three years is forever in a tennagers life.

[GMDino]

(12-14-2017, 04:38 PM)Dill Wrote: Dunno Dino, I already see a connection between the potential restrictions ahead and liberal, Hollywood elites trying to charge us more for entertainment.  A Republican Senate and House may not be enough to stop them.  We need to remove all the RINOs as well.

[Vas Deferens]

Think of it like a pay wall for your internet. You guys like WALLS right?!

[Bengalzona]

Hmm.

Maybe we'll have to shut down tha board now.


(Just joking.)

[*bfine32*]

How many people here would like the federal government controlling their private business?

[Millhouse]

(12-14-2017, 06:42 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Hmm.

Maybe we'll have to shut down tha board now.  


(Just joking.)

Hey if an ISP is controlled by a Steelers fan, they could very well slow down or block any Bengal website if they want to. 

The ironic thing is that Republicans yap about creating more of a marketplace and more capitilism by having fewer regulations. When Net Neutrality in fact was in place for that very reason to create a fair marketplace and competition on the web. It really just baffles the mind at how ****y whipped the Repubs are to the major corporations out there instead of the consumer and little guy (or girl).

[Millhouse]

(12-14-2017, 07:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: How many people here would like the federal government controlling their private business?

That argument can also be used in reference to chemical companies being regulated of dumping their wastes directly into rivers. So by that line of thought, all companies and corporations shouldnt have any regulations for how they conduct their business by the government.

[Vas Deferens]

(12-14-2017, 07:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: How many people here would like the federal government controlling their private business?

No one.

Would you like to go back to the days when you had 1 provider control the entire telephone industry?  Would you like your private tax dollars go to subsidize a private companies infrastructure then maintain a stranglehold monopoly on how you use said infrastructure?

Sorry bud.  The tired old GOP arguments don't hold up in this instance.    

[*jason*]

Ok... They're messing with my porn. When they come for my Pabst Blue Ribbon and Maker's Mark I'm taking to the streets.

I'm so ***** fed up with this flunky administration.

[Goalpost]

The speed is already sufficient out there. Here in Cincinnati both Bell and Spectrum are now up to 100 Mbps plus, and even offer higher packages. Plenty of enough sufficient for a Netflix user or a gamer. Again those speeds are entry levels now. What lane you are in now is practically pointless.

[Vas Deferens]

(12-14-2017, 07:58 PM)Goalpost Wrote: The speed is already sufficient out there.  Here in Cincinnati both Bell and Spectrum are now up to 100 Mbps plus, and even offer higher packages.  Plenty of enough sufficient for a Netflix user or a gamer.  Again those speeds are entry levels now.  What lane you are in now is practically pointless.

Were so far behind other countries in terms of speed and access it isn't even funny. 

Go to Detroit and try and get access in the inner city.

[Belsnickel]

Make it a public good, set it up as a public utility. Done.

[Goalpost]

(12-14-2017, 08:08 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Were so far behind other countries in terms of speed and access it isn't even funny. 

Go to Detroit and try and get access in the inner city.

A Gig is closer than you think. Within a year I wouldn’t be surprised.