So who else sent a letter to the FCC today (Net Neutrality)?

Discussion in 'Random Thoughts' started by GettingBuckets, Jul 12, 2017.

  1. Ringingears

    Ringingears Honorary BFF

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Likes Received:
    3,659
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Northern Californium Valley
    True. Officially two years. This argument goes back decades. It's a lot more complex than I realized until I looked into the history of it. I have no idea if this is different or not. If we use the television content vs. providers issues currently happening as a model, then it may not turn out well. My reading of past practices seems to indicate that we have had an unofficial form of NN for years. Time will tell if there are changes coming. But with all the lobbying, I'm not as optimistic.
     
  2. Outerspace Wasabi

    Outerspace Wasabi Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2017
    Likes Received:
    122
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Falkland Islands
    The internet will become like cable TV, wherein we'd have to buy packages, with content pre-approved by internet-providers, and additional costs for premium services.
     
  3. DigMe

    DigMe Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2016
    Likes Received:
    8,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Tejas
    The law went into affect in June of 2015 I believe. This is definitely not an impulsive thought for me. I think the free market did a pretty darn good job building up the infrastructure of the internet over the past 25 years or so. When this law was originally enacted I really didn't like the implications of the government giving themselves more control and power over the flow of information on the internet. All of the laws made reference to "lawful information" (which is a bit of an ominous term to me). Many people say, "Oh I trust the government to control the internet more than private businesses." Really?? This is a government who in just the past 8 years or so has been caught rampantly spying on private citizens' digital communications (remember Snowden?), sold guns to Mexican cartels who later murdered US law enforcement with them, used the IRS to punish political opposition groups, used executive powers to harass journalists, etc.. these are just a few of the things we know about.. this is the government who we want having more control over information? I've been following some of the things Ajit Pai has said since he became chairman of the FCC and I believe that his philosophy really is just less government intervention. This is more true to the philosophy of the republic than the alternative IMO. It just seems like an awfully slippery slope to hand over the control of digital info transfer to the government.
     
  4. Ringingears

    Ringingears Honorary BFF

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Likes Received:
    3,659
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Northern Californium Valley
    I suggest we let this go for now. Best to we stick to audio.
     
  5. Ringingears

    Ringingears Honorary BFF

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Likes Received:
    3,659
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Northern Californium Valley
    Cool.
     
  6. Melvillian

    Melvillian Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2017
    Likes Received:
    1,345
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Yes because for 25yrs the ISP's did not challenge government oversight. Verizon challenged and won, so now without Title 2 oversight there will now be less regulation than there was in the 25yrs you are referring to. It's never going back to how it was before 2015.

    What you are saying is an argument Ajit Pai keep using and it's very misleading because it's a false equivalence in a sense.
     
  7. DigMe

    DigMe Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2016
    Likes Received:
    8,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Tejas
    You've only addressed one part of my argument.
     
  8. Melvillian

    Melvillian Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2017
    Likes Received:
    1,345
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    The argument doesn't hold because it is based on government regulation only being present for the past two years, when in reality it's been there for a long time.
     
  9. Outerspace Wasabi

    Outerspace Wasabi Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2017
    Likes Received:
    122
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Falkland Islands
    How has the US government adversely affected and impeded your current internet access and experience?

    What control of the internet are you speaking of?

    Because right now, in the US, I have free access to anything on the internet... So where is this government interference?
     
  10. GettingBuckets

    GettingBuckets Almost "Made"

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2016
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    63
    All I'm saying is I can't wait to pay an extra 20 dollars a month to f'ing use Google and half the other websites I visit to get throttled into oblivion. It will bring me back to the dial-up days...
     
  11. a44100Hz

    a44100Hz Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2016
    Likes Received:
    1,159
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    US East
    Eh. In most parts of the U.S. there is only access to one broadband provider; competition is low and there's no impetus for ISPs to expand their networks or their speeds. Even in large urban areas we pay more for less speed than many other modern cities.

    Some info: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/31/...in-internet-speed-and-affordability.html?_r=0
     
  12. DigMe

    DigMe Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2016
    Likes Received:
    8,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Tejas
    In a very different way.

    We’re on different pages here. I’m talking about the government giving itself more and more power to oversee, invade and control information on the internet. I’m talking about the future. I’m not really worried about getting the fastest possible cat videos for myself. Has the US govt sold guns to Mexico that were used to attack you? No? But they did that to someone. Has the US government illegally spied on your email? Neither of us have any idea but they have done that to many. That and the other examples from earlier were under the Obama admin. Do you think that Trump’s admin would be any different? We’ve no reason to think so. These things all come from power granted and then abused. When we see this established history and then a govt talking about “legal information” (what information will they deem “illegal”?) it does not fill me with hope for the future of a so-called “neutral” internet.


    You know what else will screw up your access to cat videos? Lack of further investment in infrastructure. The internet was built by private investment in the infrastructure by businesses. Guess what - after the whole net neutrality thing got going the investment in internet infrastructure dropped by $200million per year.

    That’s another part to Ajit Pai’s plan - he wants to remove barriers to new companies entering the free market. I believe that could really pay off for everyone in the end. With greater competition will comes more infrastructure plus better and cheaper service. I realize that I am lucky to have a fantastic alternative to Time Warner/Spectrum in my town. Everyone should have the opportunity for more choices and that’s what Pai has stated that he wants to see. Not many are talking about that though because this has become a partisan issue and that wouldn’t fit the narrative of him being in bed with the providers since he wants to increase competition.

    Hey, guys, I want to say that I really don’t enjoy arguing on the internet and usually try to avoid it largely because of the hate, stereotypes and misunderstandings that often happen in this medium. I’m a pretty empathetic and peaceful guy. Please know that this is most definitely NOT a partisan political thing for me. I didn’t vote for trump and I always try to look at issues with healthy doses of logic, history and compassion regardless of what side of the aisle they come from.

    Of course both sides of the issue have their pros and cons and both sides of the issue deal with TONS of pure speculation. That’s why I am definitely looking to some history of all sides on this issue. I may not reply further in this thread unless the mood really strikes me because it has reminded me somewhat of the tedium of arguing on the internet.
     
  13. GettingBuckets

    GettingBuckets Almost "Made"

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2016
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    63
    @DigMe I didn't realize that this was a partisan issue at all for anybody here. Nobody was trying to take one side or the other on that front. My problem and many other people's problems is with the bureaucracy in general and the freedom that they have to do whatever they want. For the most part, I really have not heard of many people defending what Pai is doing, but that's besides the point along with your random remark that I use my internet just for recreation or to watch cat videos...

    Please don't assume that other people on this thread are not educated or have done a bit of research themselves on issues that we bring up especially when it affects all of us whether we like it or not. Sure, we may be biased sometimes one way or the other, but feel free to keep chipping in and providing more info. I really didn't consider any of this much of an argument since it felt more like a discussion to me.

    Back to the point especially when it comes to competition. I might be wrong, but I feel like with many established markets, competition doesn't help that much since the bigger companies (Verizon, AT&T, Comcast) always end up swallowing up the smaller companies and already have such a large hold on most of the nation in the first place. Furthermore, considering that these larger companies will have more leeway to favor their own online services and content, they will be able to charge more for any type of service or content that isn't directly helping them and can use our information (more than they already are) to limit what we can do unless we reach deeper into our pockets.

    Edit: Last thing I want to do is for this thread or these posts to end up in the infamous "How to Win Friends and Influence People" section.
     
  14. Outerspace Wasabi

    Outerspace Wasabi Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2017
    Likes Received:
    122
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Falkland Islands

    And corporations don't spy on you? They're not collecting data on you?

    You said the US government sells weapons... The US government doesn't sell or manufacture weapons... Corporations do... the US government is simply an intermediary that facilitates sales and maximizes profits for corporations.

    You really trust corporations?

    Who pulls the government's strings? Who greases their palms?

    It's ironic to say you trust corporations more than you do government when the type of governance we have is essentially a corporatocracy.

    In an era where corporations strive to monopolize a market and encroach onto others to become multi-headed beasts, choice is becoming an ever-increasing illusion, so what makes you think that disposing of Net Neutrality would promote and foster healthy competition and ample choices for the consumer?

    Since what we have is a corporatocracy, the market isn't an environment determined by natural selection... it's one determined by selective breading..

    Net Neutrality is currently preventing telecommunication conglomerates from exercising complete dominance and control over us as internet users.

    It's keeping that corporatocracy at bay .
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2017
  15. Deep Funk

    Deep Funk Deep thoughts - Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2015
    Likes Received:
    9,028
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    Home Page:
    That.

    The corporations, government agencies and certain politicians do not like the fact that there exists a platform where information can be freely shared through all kinds of media with little to no control. The users create and control the content. This allows the individual user to compare and analyse information for specific use(s) and make up his or her own mind (i.e. Wikipedia, Encyclopedia Britannica, TechDirt, NYTimes, blogs, forums etcetera).

    Once that freedom is gone, we are back to Medieval times secretly making copies and smuggling books because "reading is dangerous."

    I might not be an American citizen but once Net Neutrality is gone in the U.S. it is very easy for other continents and countries to follow suit. If such a situation is to occur it is time to hit the streets and vote with your wallet (i.e. boycotting companies who do not respect Net Neutrality).

    This is a historically painful topic. When do people learn?
     

Share This Page