Net Neutrality a warning for the future!

[trouble time]

@trouble time honestly though, what is going to get blocked? i really just do not believe that we are going to see an aggressive movement by any major ISP to block and throttle our favorites websites; people WILL switch ISPs if they're current provider makes web surfing inconvenient for them because we have that option here in America due to the existence of a competitive market, and in almost every case the ISP will not risk that.

that being said, we very well might see a large scale block on content provision sites that promote the illegal downloading of pirated software, which is entirely understandable. beyond that i do not know; maybe adult websites could see some threat, but the adult media industry is so massive that i am sure some incentives to keep their bandwidth open could be made.

the bottom line is that, for the average consumer who does not partake in morally questionable internet activity (like me), they're not going to see some major change in their internet experience.

How can we swtich ISPs when there's most people in America only have one ISP in their service area? We DON'T have a competitive market in around 2/3rds of the United States, and I don't see how you got that out of my first post when I already mentioned that I personally only have one ISP and other people have brought this up too. The only way to change ISPs is to move. Not to mention that companies have tried to throttle Netflix before, and now they actually can do it since the rules that made them stop doing that aren't legally enforceable anymore. I don't put it pass them to make youtube cost more than other website either since other countries do it, and there is literally nothing stopping them. There's no competition, there's no legally enforceable standards they have to adhere to, there is nothing stopping them so why won't they?

Also, I don't think adult content is morally questionable personally if you're implying that.

 

[Marquise*]

Seriously I would chose many of the participants here as my ISP providers if I could. You know... building a better internet? More friendly? More free? Morally responsible?

Yeah there is a lot of finger pointing in the air. The most worrisome is when one user's real info are plastering the internet supporting a statement that is a lie they never even were aware they had posted. (As in lie because they don't agree upon.) It reminds me of those biased surveys about most popular browser, when it is counted by versions owned and installed when it comes by default by the ISP provider's package or the OS sold with the computer. -_-; Argh

 

[dbchest]

there are alternative forms of internet regardless of location; satellite internet providers such as hughes net are an option which cover pretty much every inch of the united states. like yourself however, i also live in an area with a single ISP that holds a monopoly over the county and it is trash internet (updating games can take several days), but i still have the option of seeking out a satellite internet service provider like the one mentioned above if i choose.

as mentioned earlier, the net neutrality bill made internet access a utility, meaning it costs Facebook and Netflix the same amount of money to push their MASSIVE amount of content to consumers as it costs grandma to sell the croquet blankets she makes in her basement on her personal website. so maybe some people think this is okay and fundamentally i would agree, but i also do not think it is wrong for an ISP to charge corporate entities like Facebook and Netflix more than grandma, because Facebook and Netflix use 1,000x the bandwidth that grandma uses.

at the end of the day, corporations like Facebook and Netflix do not want to see their profits go down, so if their costs go up then our costs go it, it is natural, but Netflix provides a service i would be willing to pay up to like $39.99 each month for, so it goes without saying that i am happy with the service Netflix has provided so far. it is not the end of the world if i have to pay a few extra dollars each month for my streaming service.

when i referred to internet activity as morally questionable, i was referring to the illegal downloading of copyrighted material, not the adult media industry, and even though i don't waste my time with that stuff i do not consider the adult media industry to be morally questionable.

 

[trouble time]

there are alternative forms of internet regardless of location; satellite internet providers such as hughes net are an option which cover pretty much every inch of the united states. like yourself however, i also live in an area with a single ISP that holds a monopoly over the county and it is trash internet (updating games can take several days), but i still have the option of seeking out a satellite internet service provider like the one mentioned above if i choose.

as mentioned earlier, the net neutrality bill made internet access a utility, meaning it costs Facebook and Netflix the same amount of money to push their MASSIVE amount of content to consumers as it costs grandma to sell the croquet blankets she makes in her basement on her personal website. so maybe some people think this is okay and fundamentally i would agree, but i also do not think it is wrong for an ISP to charge corporate entities like Facebook and Netflix more than grandma, because Facebook and Netflix use 1,000x the bandwidth that grandma uses.

at the end of the day, corporations like Facebook and Netflix do not want to see their profits go down, so if their costs go up then our costs go it, it is natural, but Netflix provides a service i would be willing to pay up to like $39.99 each month for, so it goes without saying that i am happy with the service Netflix has provided so far. it is not the end of the world if i have to pay a few extra dollars each month for my streaming service.

when i referred to internet activity as morally questionable, i was referring to the illegal downloading of copyrighted material, not the adult media industry, and even though i don't waste my time with that stuff i do not consider the adult media industry to be morally questionable.

Having satellite internet is like using a mobile hotspot. It's hardly a worthwhile alternative. Its also expensive comparatively. Thats like saying roller blades are an alternative to having a car. Also your position changed from "nothing will happen" to "well I don't mind paying more". At least you acknowledge that removing net neutrality literally just made the internet worse.

 

[Sauteed_Onion]

And the people regulating the who pays what regarding ganny selling blankies on ebay versus large corporate entities like Twittter/facebook/youtube have an extremely documented and well proven history of doing the exact opposite of anything they claim, and as well have a proven track record of being questionable morally.

Then once you take Facbook, Youtube, Amazon, Ebay etc.. (pick random corporate entity and eve still, most of these do things that are morally questionable under the guise of making a buck no, nevermind to to Zuckie betraying his country to the highest bidder and literally admitting it), all kinds of deals all over the internet will have the rates they charge increase (to deal with higher isp rates, if companies start cutting costs to keep up with increased oversight, the results do usually involve firing people, using another service provider, and generally scaling back the quality of the service.) And without going political nuances of liberalism (at least what it's modern incarnation is in the U.S.) and the faux conservatism that seems to be generally accepted by most of us here, you may not think about why they want people fired and dependant on hand outs or stressed out and reliant on pharmaceuticals. Like over half of my reasoning for not liking this can't even be talked about, and some of my observations are speculative only. And go beyond politics into the realm of who is paying our politicians. Because in the end, it is they who are pulling the strings on the levels most of us should be concerned about.

 

[Marquise*]

I am wondering just how much we are supposed to pay for PayPal or Ebay in that big scheme?

I mean I do understand that we already are paying for the internet access, but now we would have to do more? I know I am from a country where we are surrounded by rivers and mostly not saline and less polluted in time, we just have our taxes to help maintaining our water treatment. But I know in some places I get bugged when the toilets in public places are to be unlocked, are just accessible for clients and I can imagine how dirty it could become (and how understandable) if I lived where each time I have to go, I have to pay and leave a tip! I think we are now in a more or less tainted flow of information now, but paying for it, I would be *issed if I would had to pay and leave a tip each time I sit in front of my computer. -_-

At least my electricity provider didn't thought of offering packages for using my favorite electrical appliances above what we already pay.

 

[FleshToDust]

@Marquise* You shouldn't worry too much about it. Things will probably stay the same. All of a sudden all websites forcing you to pay a subscription just because NN is gone is an over reaction I think. Everything will be fine. Nobody likes subscriptions anyways so a company doing that would end their business. Businesses aren't as evil as you think. Did you see that after the tax cut a few days ago a bunch of companies gave their employees raises and $1000 bonus'? And look, NN has been gone for a bit now and everything is still the same. I know it's easy to think about the negative but that whole doom and gloom mindset will give you mad depression.

 

[trouble time]

@FleshToDust
NN isnt actually gone yet, the policy change will probably take over a year to go into effect. The gears of law dont move that fast. They voted to change it...but they have to draft up and implement the change, descisions like this dont take place immediately. Also, it is bad, there are no positives to this, it will only make things worse. Also, unless yoy want to abstain from intermlnet entirely or pay extra for worse vonnectiins via sattilite, companies dont have to worry about competition in this market, its unlikely every website will have a subscription. But if just one does all this has done is make using the internet appreciably worse.

 

[FleshToDust]

@trouble time I don't want to get too far into this as this subject can get heated and that could cause drama and the closing of this thread but amazon already does what you're describing. When you buy a product you can pay for the normal shipping time or pay extra for fast delivery.

 

[trouble time]

@trouble time I don't want to get too far into this as this subject can get heated and that could cause drama and the closing of this thread but amazon already does what you're describing. When you buy a product you can pay for the normal shipping time or pay extra for fast delivery.

What do you think im describing, i didnt describe anything but how slow the process of losing net neutrality will be. You seem to be replying to an argument you made up. Also thats entirely different to a subscription service for a website. A better analogy would be that instead of free shipping you just have to pay for it. Or in the case of throttling connections which companies can do now since title 2 is gone AND they no longer have the power to enforce pre-title 2 regulations from before 2015, its like free shipping means they can now break whatevers in the box and leave you with the peices that may still be usable but it sure wont be as good. For one thing its not just amazon, as almost any delivery service does this. Secondly, its not the same in the same way the fact subsonic ammunition exists isnt a reason netflix or yputube should ve slowed down. We can make bullets go slower so why not make it cost more to use netflix! Its a complete non-sequitr. Again, no good can actually come from this in its current state. Theres nothing to be glad about, there is no silver lining, this is bad. The very best we can hope for realistically is that it stays the same, but it won't.

 

[FleshToDust]

@trouble time Your previous comment is unclear so tell me exactly what you think will happen.

 

[SOC]

My state representative mailed me his response after all my calls about it. He supports Ajit Pai. -_-

Spoiler

 

[trouble time]

@trouble time Your previous comment is unclear so tell me exactly what you think will happen.

I dont see it as unclear, theres some mobile phone induced spelling errors though, i think you just argued against what you expected to read.

There are several things that could happen, too many for me to really go into, but lt its all negative. A few examples...

Higher costs for streaming services, potentially we might have either limited access to them at full speed as well and have to pay extra to keep higher speeds on those sites or possibly to access them at all.

Similar to how you need to buy an xbox live memebership to play online games, you will likely (this is honestly most likely thing to happen imo) youll also need to pay your ISP for higher speeds for gaming, possibly for a faster connection (which will more or less be mandatory to stay competitive) or possibly to even be allowed the privelege of online gaming at all. The latter is less likely than the former, but its a possibility and theres nothing to stop them from doing that one, satalite internet is high latency, playing online games with it requires you to rely on signs and portents from the aether to even do anything.

Blocking any competiors websites...actually not going to happen, cause they wont have competitors. They generally have no competitors and new isps arent likely to pop up due to the costs of setting up, without even bringing zoning laws into it. Its like starting an airline, hardly anyone has the capital to do so, and even if they try it could take years to get their infastructure in place.

Are there any positives...no. literally none.

 

[FleshToDust]

@trouble time In your comment you mention being charged for a faster connection. I don't know how things are in America though I'm an avid viewer of American politics, in canada when you sign up for internet there are 2 main services. Shaw and Sasktel. When you sign up for either of them you can pay for standard internet speeds or you have the option of paying more for a faster connection. It sounds like that is what you're describing in America and that it would be a bad thing to have that choice.

 

[trouble time]

@FleshToDust Thats not what im describing, we already have the ability to pay for differeing connection speeds with faster ones costing more. The problem is that streaming services like say youtube, having a sperate cost on top of what we already pay. Or, gaming requireing not just xbox live or playstation plus, but also a 2nd additional subscription from the isp or 1. You'll be playing at reduced speeds or 2. You dont get to use that data at all.

Another possibility is straight up having to pay to access certain websites at all, for example they coupd say "Your internet package doesnt come with youtube anymore, but for 20$ more a month you get it and facebook." Essentially its just that you end up paying more and getting less.

 

[FleshToDust]

I don't think that will happen. It doesn't sound realistic to me.

 

[trouble time]

I don't think that will happen. It doesn't sound realistic to me.

It happens in other countries, so I don't see how it isn't realistic. They also have literally no reason not to either, unless it gets to the point people can't afford or simply won't pay for it, and the former is a lot more likely than the latter as for much of modern living the internet is pretty necessary.

 

[Marquise*]

@SOC *facepalms* Thanks anyway to had voiced your opinion to him. ^%^&%
@FleshToDust Too late for depression.