(12-18-2017, 11:00 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: If Twitter is dumb enough to do that then someone else will form a Free version.

(12-19-2017, 09:12 AM)Au165 Wrote: This right here actually explains why it was allowed to happen. People don't even truly understand what is now in play. It has nothing to do with Twitter, the ISPs can put twitter behind a paywall. Many don't realize they can now be double charged for things like Netflix, Spotify, etc. They can be charged once by the ISP to get to the content and another time to actually get the content from the creator once they get there.

(12-19-2017, 02:26 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So let’s repeal the regulation that allows areas to be broken up by the companies.  I would love to get Verizon fios here but am stuck with ATT, Comcast, or directv.

(12-18-2017, 11:00 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: If Twitter is dumb enough to do that then someone else will form a Free version.

(12-19-2017, 04:57 PM)Benton Wrote: The pro-repeal story is that companies like Comcast are "losing" money by customers using their network to access stuff created by third parties (Twitter, Netflix, etc). Which is like saying the electric company is "losing" money by customers using their power grid to toast bread. This is like the power company getting to charge you a fee for using electricity to toast bread, another fee for allowing you to power your air conditioner, another fee for flipping on a light switch, etc.

(12-19-2017, 07:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Or as I mentioned earlier it's like saying a Baker is losing money because other bakers are selling pies in his shops.

As has been mentioned before: the Public utilities analogies have zero merit; as ISPs are not public utilities. 

And from what I understand the electric company does charge you based on how much you use their commodity. 

(12-19-2017, 07:41 PM)Benton Wrote: Public utilities weren’t public utilities until they were public utilities.

I understand the argument that private businesses should be allowed to charge what they want. The problem is, like other utilities, the internet has become something bigger.

As far as the electric company, you’re missing the other half of the issue. Electric companies and telecom charge you for usage. That’s how they make money. What you do with that usage should be up to you, whether it’s powerig Christmas lights or making toast. Telecom is saying they should decide the end use, or at least charge you more for it depending on their own interests.

(12-19-2017, 07:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Once/if the internet access is deemed a public utility then folks that keep bring up public utility will have a point; outside of that, they're just diverting from the over-reach that net neutrality caused and the rational of repealing it.  

(12-19-2017, 08:16 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: what part of the previous legislation did you consider over reach?

(12-19-2017, 08:16 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: what part of the previous legislation did you consider over reach?

(12-19-2017, 09:12 AM)Au165 Wrote: This right here actually explains why it was allowed to happen. People don't even truly understand what is now in play. It has nothing to do with Twitter, the ISPs can put twitter behind a paywall. Many don't realize they can now be double charged for things like Netflix, Spotify, etc. They can be charged once by the ISP to get to the content and another time to actually get the content from the creator once they get there.

(12-19-2017, 09:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The part where the government tells private enterprise what product they must provide. 

Folks can say all they want such as "we use the internet to pay our bills" or "we use the internet to schedule our trips". There is no talk or threat of that being effected in anyway; as I can pay bills or schedule trips in the "slow lane". The "fast lane" is required for entertainment and that is the only thing that if ISPs went wild would be effected.

So basically, folks for Net Neutrality are saying: The government needs to protect my "right" to entertainment. No they don't Private businesses should be able to charge you want they want for entertainment. 

(12-19-2017, 09:48 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: I see where you are coming from...

I also agree with you that the gov needs to stay out of many private sectors.  I for one could care less about cake shops, but this is bigger than flour and eggs.

First of all SEO, website interaction and overall consumer experience is greatly affected by the speed at which it responds to user engagement.  If a comcast decided they wanted to get into the 'travel planning' industry, they would have an immediate upper hand.  Effectively stifling competition and entrepreneurship.  I understand the entertainment argument, but if its merely about bandwidth and bandwidth alone, the law should have been written as such.  It was not, and there is a reason for that.  You do realize that we are already 'paying more for increased use' (as used in the electricity argument) right?

Secondly, I have a problem when the nomenclature 'private industry' is used in reference to an industry that takes massive government hand outs and participates in local efforts to craft legislation in their favor.

Out of pure curiosity, what do you think about the falsified 'anti net neutrality' FCC public comments?

  

(12-19-2017, 07:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Once/if the internet access is deemed a public utility then folks that keep bring up public utility will have a point; outside of that, they're just diverting from the over-reach that net neutrality caused and the rational of repealing it.  

(12-19-2017, 02:26 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So let’s repeal the regulation that allows areas to be broken up by the companies.  I would love to get Verizon fios here but am stuck with ATT, Comcast, or directv.

(12-14-2017, 09:38 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Don't electric companies charge more depending on how much electricity you use?

(12-20-2017, 10:07 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: There's no reason that everyone in every major city and their suburbs shouldn't have access to affordable gigabit speed internet. Spend the money on upgrading our internet infrastructure and regulate the internet like a public utility.

(12-20-2017, 11:12 AM)CageTheBengal Wrote: This is more like cutting off part of the electricity in your house after you have used so much and then having to pay another 5 dollars for more power usage until your next pay cycle.