Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2017 23:57:52 GMT -5
I work in IT for a large US company...This actually is pretty scary regarding many aspects
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2017 23:59:12 GMT -5
If the internet dies, hopefully I might be able to buy a video game with all the content already in the game. That'll be the day. the content is usually already in the game...just have to pay to access it
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,359
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Nov 26, 2017 0:16:43 GMT -5
I work in IT for a large US company...This actually is pretty scary regarding many aspects Does your business sell products online? This can be catestrophic to things like that for anyone not owned by an ISP or something Amazon-sized.
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Nov 26, 2017 1:11:23 GMT -5
At the very least my current internet provider (cable one) is for net neutrality, so at least there's one ISP that's for it. Any other ISPs who support NN?
|
|
|
Post by burdette25159 on Nov 26, 2017 15:44:55 GMT -5
If the internet dies, hopefully I might be able to buy a video game with all the content already in the game. But what about games that are digital only? Will the end of net neutrality mean that game companies will have to make physical collections of games or will we have to hope that game companies have to make GameStop exclusive physical releases
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 26, 2017 15:50:16 GMT -5
I only buy physical games anyway.
|
|
Ultimo Gallos
Grimlock
Dreams SUCK!Nightmares live FOREVER!
Posts: 14,419
|
Post by Ultimo Gallos on Nov 26, 2017 16:30:54 GMT -5
At the very least my current internet provider (cable one) is for net neutrality, so at least there's one ISP that's for it. Any other ISPs who support NN? Considering how bad Cableone's cable is I am shocked they are doing a good thing with their internet. It's been what almost 10 years since Cableone has had any of the Viacom channels?
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,224
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Nov 28, 2017 1:39:31 GMT -5
I'm honestly not sure if it will make a difference. Net Neutrality only got put in place very recently and before that there was no real sign that the ISPs were going to introduce a cable model for the internet.
I see both sides of the argument. Pro Net Neutrality people don't want the giant corporations to control and censor the internet. Anti Net Neutrality people don't want the government(fcc) to control and censor the internet.
Personally I don't think either is likely to happen no matter which way it goes.
|
|
|
Post by YAKMAN is ICHIBAN on Nov 28, 2017 9:40:37 GMT -5
I'm honestly not sure if it will make a difference. Net Neutrality only got put in place very recently and before that there was no real sign that the ISPs were going to introduce a cable model for the internet.I see both sides of the argument. Pro Net Neutrality people don't want the giant corporations to control and censor the internet. Anti Net Neutrality people don't want the government(fcc) to control and censor the internet. Personally I don't think either is likely to happen no matter which way it goes. There were numerous instances of bad conduct on the part of ISPs, which is why the new rules were put in place (also because the old rules were gutted by a court in 2014) There is an argument to be made about the specifics of the regulations, whether anti-trust rules are more appropriate, etc, but I have zero belief that the rules are being changed in any sort of good faith as opposed to simply rewarding the ISPs for their years of lobbying Note that Comcast has already walked back its promises about staying away from paid prioritization, instead saying it will not engage in "anti-competitive" paid prioritization (a statement which is purposefully vague) www.freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-historyMADISON RIVER: In 2005, North Carolina ISP Madison River Communications blocked the voice-over-internet protocol (VOIP) service Vonage. Vonage filed a complaint with the FCC after receiving a slew of customer complaints. The FCC stepped in to sanction Madison River and prevent further blocking, but it lacks the authority to stop this kind of abuse today. COMCAST: In 2005, the nation’s largest ISP, Comcast, began secretly blocking peer-to-peer technologies that its customers were using over its network. Users of services like BitTorrent and Gnutella were unable to connect to these services. 2007 investigations from the Associated Press, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and others confirmed that Comcast was indeed blocking or slowing file-sharing applications without disclosing this fact to its customers. TELUS: In 2005, Canada’s second-largest telecommunications company, Telus, began blocking access to a server that hosted a website supporting a labor strike against the company. Researchers at Harvard and the University of Toronto found that this action resulted in Telus blocking an additional 766 unrelated sites. AT&T: From 2007–2009, AT&T forced Apple to block Skype and other competing VOIP phone services on the iPhone. The wireless provider wanted to prevent iPhone users from using any application that would allow them to make calls on such “over-the-top” voice services. The Google Voice app received similar treatment from carriers like AT&T when it came on the scene in 2009. WINDSTREAM: In 2010, Windstream Communications, a DSL provider with more than 1 million customers at the time, copped to hijacking user-search queries made using the Google toolbar within Firefox. Users who believed they had set the browser to the search engine of their choice were redirected to Windstream’s own search portal and results. MetroPCS: In 2011, MetroPCS, at the time one of the top-five U.S. wireless carriers, announced plans to block streaming video over its 4G network from all sources except YouTube. MetroPCS then threw its weight behind Verizon’s court challenge against the FCC’s 2010 open internet ruling, hoping that rejection of the agency’s authority would allow the company to continue its anti-consumer practices. PAXFIRE: In 2011, the Electronic Frontier Foundation found that several small ISPs were redirecting search queries via the vendor Paxfire. The ISPs identified in the initial Electronic Frontier Foundation report included Cavalier, Cogent, Frontier, Fuse, DirecPC, RCN and Wide Open West. Paxfire would intercept a person’s search request at Bing and Yahoo and redirect it to another page. By skipping over the search service’s results, the participating ISPs would collect referral fees for delivering users to select websites. AT&T, SPRINT and VERIZON: From 2011–2013, AT&T, Sprint and Verizon blocked Google Wallet, a mobile-payment system that competed with a similar service called Isis, which all three companies had a stake in developing. EUROPE: A 2012 report from the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications found that violations of Net Neutrality affected at least one in five users in Europe. The report found that blocked or slowed connections to services like VOIP, peer-to-peer technologies, gaming applications and email were commonplace. VERIZON: In 2012, the FCC caught Verizon Wireless blocking people from using tethering applications on their phones. Verizon had asked Google to remove 11 free tethering applications from the Android marketplace. These applications allowed users to circumvent Verizon’s $20 tethering fee and turn their smartphones into Wi-Fi hot spots. By blocking those applications, Verizon violated a Net Neutrality pledge it made to the FCC as a condition of the 2008 airwaves auction. AT&T: In 2012, AT&T announced that it would disable the FaceTime video-calling app on its customers’ iPhones unless they subscribed to a more expensive text-and-voice plan. AT&T had one goal in mind: separating customers from more of their money by blocking alternatives to AT&T’s own products. VERIZON: During oral arguments in Verizon v. FCC in 2013, judges asked whether the phone giant would favor some preferred services, content or sites over others if the court overruled the agency’s existing open internet rules. Verizon counsel Helgi Walker had this to say: “I’m authorized to state from my client today that but for these rules we would be exploring those types of arrangements.” Walker’s admission might have gone unnoticed had she not repeated it on at least five separate occasions during arguments.
|
|
Push R Truth
Patti Mayonnaise
Unique and Special Snowflake, and a pants-less heathen.
Perpetually Constipated
Posts: 39,293
|
Post by Push R Truth on Nov 28, 2017 13:38:23 GMT -5
I'm honestly not sure if it will make a difference. Net Neutrality only got put in place very recently and before that there was no real sign that the ISPs were going to introduce a cable model for the internet. I see both sides of the argument. Pro Net Neutrality people don't want the giant corporations to control and censor the internet. Anti Net Neutrality people don't want the government(fcc) to control and censor the internet. Personally I don't think either is likely to happen no matter which way it goes. My local ISP was throttling Netflix and would brag about it. Anything over standard definition would be buffering like hell. Yet the Amazon/Hulu/Youtube were crispy and smooth. The highest tier of of their package had Netflix working perfectly. Using speed tests there was no difference between the 2nd and the highest tier. They literally just removed some throttles. I fully expect those buttholes to double down on their practice if NN dies.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Nov 28, 2017 22:00:35 GMT -5
I'm honestly not sure if it will make a difference. Net Neutrality only got put in place very recently and before that there was no real sign that the ISPs were going to introduce a cable model for the internet. I see both sides of the argument. Pro Net Neutrality people don't want the giant corporations to control and censor the internet. Anti Net Neutrality people don't want the government(fcc) to control and censor the internet. Personally I don't think either is likely to happen no matter which way it goes. an ISP literally blackmailed Netflix with shitty bandwidth for months so customers would cancel until they paid out of the ass for a "fastlane" that's the reason this passed. If it's repealed then they can do this to any service they want, just to be unnecessarily greedy bastards, and then charge the customer too.
|
|
|
Post by Bang Bang Bart on Nov 28, 2017 22:36:35 GMT -5
I'm honestly not sure if it will make a difference. Net Neutrality only got put in place very recently and before that there was no real sign that the ISPs were going to introduce a cable model for the internet. I see both sides of the argument. Pro Net Neutrality people don't want the giant corporations to control and censor the internet. Anti Net Neutrality people don't want the government(fcc) to control and censor the internet. Personally I don't think either is likely to happen no matter which way it goes. an ISP literally blackmailed Netflix with shitty bandwidth for months so customers would cancel until they paid out of the ass for a "fastlane" that's the reason this passed. If it's repealed then they can do this to any service they want, just to be unnecessarily greedy bastards, and then charge the customer too. And all because the guy who runs the FCC ised to work for Verizon.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,359
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Nov 29, 2017 12:08:24 GMT -5
an ISP literally blackmailed Netflix with shitty bandwidth for months so customers would cancel until they paid out of the ass for a "fastlane" that's the reason this passed. If it's repealed then they can do this to any service they want, just to be unnecessarily greedy bastards, and then charge the customer too. And all because the guy who runs the FCC ised to work for Verizon. He probably still has stock options to boot.
|
|
Blindkarevik
Grimlock
Rock... Paper... Straight-edge!
I Like To <blank>
Posts: 14,343
|
Post by Blindkarevik on Nov 29, 2017 12:19:05 GMT -5
My ISP has gone on record saying that no matter what happens, they have no plans to change their business model from what it currently is so they're definitely on the Net Neutrality train.
However, that could go one of two ways.... one, all the ISPs in my area that start taking advantage will have customers running from them, to my ISP in droves making my ISP stronger and will make everything stay the same for all enternity. The second, and most likely, is that since nobody is REALLY an island unto themselves, be it corporate, partners, or government themselves... will probably force a change in my ISP's policies, making it conform to the same ideals as Comcast and the like.
I guess the only positive takeaway I have in this is, if Net Neutrality goes away.... when everything is enacted, I probably have at least another year or so with my current ISP and current rules until the hammer drops. Of course, all this could be avoided by the head of the FCC just shaking his fist and saying, "Curse you, common sense" then retiring back to his underground lair.
|
|
|
Post by burdette25159 on Nov 29, 2017 12:28:18 GMT -5
If this comes to pass and the inetivable lawsuits take place, the head of the FCC may have to take his salary and spend it on attorneys.
|
|
|
Post by Bang Bang Bart on Nov 29, 2017 14:19:10 GMT -5
If this comes to pass and the inetivable lawsuits take place, the head of the FCC may have to take his salary and spend it on attorneys. And that's not also including the raised status of being "the most hated man in America" that comes with f***ing the internet for everyonr.
|
|
|
Post by castletonsnob on Nov 30, 2017 20:59:05 GMT -5
Alright everyone, post this thread in every forum you go to. Make sure everyone knows about this.
|
|
|
Post by Sponsored by Groose Wipes on Nov 30, 2017 21:22:16 GMT -5
However, that could go one of two ways.... one, all the ISPs in my area that start taking advantage will have customers running from them, to my ISP in droves making my ISP stronger and will make everything stay the same for all enternity. The second, and most likely, is that since nobody is REALLY an island unto themselves, be it corporate, partners, or government themselves... will probably force a change in my ISP's policies, making it conform to the same ideals as Comcast and the like. The problem is most people in the country are stuck with only one ISP to work with in their area, so there's no alternative for them. All you can get is Comcast? Well sucks to be you. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
|
Post by TOK Hehe'd Around & Found Out on Nov 30, 2017 22:14:18 GMT -5
an ISP literally blackmailed Netflix with shitty bandwidth for months so customers would cancel until they paid out of the ass for a "fastlane" that's the reason this passed. If it's repealed then they can do this to any service they want, just to be unnecessarily greedy bastards, and then charge the customer too. And all because the guy who runs the FCC ised to work for Verizon. The former head of the FCC (who instituted the NN regulations that are getting revoked) also worked for Verizon before going to the FCC. That's how regulatory organizations work.
|
|
|
Post by YAKMAN is ICHIBAN on Dec 1, 2017 9:40:41 GMT -5
And all because the guy who runs the FCC ised to work for Verizon. The former head of the FCC (who instituted the NN regulations that are getting revoked) also worked for Verizon before going to the FCC. That's how regulatory organizations work. Yeah, kind of hard to get qualified people without some industry association You just have to hope they aren't horrible people and do their job in good faith, rather than just cooperate in regulatory capture.
|
|