Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 70

Thread: Net neutrality is dead

  1. #16
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,781
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    Fine, I will look it up, but I see no sense in having an out-of-box negative reaction
    I have an out-of-box negative reaction to anything proposed by the govenment.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    That seems very generic to me. I don't see why you should not view an idea on its own merits.
    I don't see any merits.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    They can offer prices for different bandwidth tiers, but how are they going to offer the "multi media booster package" that specifically charges video streaming consumers without violating the above?
    The same way they throttle traffic or block traffic from "non-preferred" content providers.

    Merchants are forbidden by law to charge extra if a customer uses a credit card for purchase. Merchants are not forbidden to offer a cash discount to shoppers. Guess what? Prices of all merchandise just went up. Who are the most affected by this policy to "protect" consumers? Those who could least afford it. The poor don't use credit cards as often as rich people. Don't need a study to prove that.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    And we must be as vigilant for mega corporations seeking to profit from their monopolistic or oligopolistic business models. We can vote politicians out, we cannot do a thing against providers in monopoly/ duopoly situations like cable providers.
    I can choose not to do business with an evil mega corporation. I can't choose NOT to do business with a government here to "help" me.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  2. #17
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,926
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    I have an out-of-box negative reaction to anything proposed by the govenment.
    Do you have an overall positive reaction from changes/ legislation proposed by heavily oligopolistic industries (cable, broadcasting, insurance, banking, airlines)?

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    I don't see any merits.
    So the fact that an ISP or the government cannot block any content they want is not a merit to you?

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    The same way they throttle traffic or block traffic from "non-preferred" content providers.
    As per Net neutrality rules, how is that not illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Merchants are forbidden by law to charge extra if a customer uses a credit card for purchase. Merchants are not forbidden to offer a cash discount to shoppers. Guess what? Prices of all merchandise just went up. Who are the most affected by this policy to "protect" consumers? Those who could least afford it. The poor don't use credit cards as often as rich people. Don't need a study to prove that.
    First of all, many merchants penalise for credit cards usage unless there is a minimum purchase. I don't see any "forbidden by law" Second, only prices of credit card transactions went up and since the poor use cash, well they are not affected. Right?

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    I can choose not to do business with an evil mega corporation. I can't choose NOT to do business with a government here to "help" me.
    If Comcast blocks Netflix, Gmail and Facebook tomorrow, where are you going to go? Verizon? AT&T?
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  3. #18
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,781
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    Do you have an overall positive reaction from changes/ legislation proposed by heavily oligopolistic industries (cable, broadcasting, insurance, banking, airlines)?
    Hell no! They are only a step above government.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    So the fact that an ISP or the government cannot block any content they want is not a merit to you?
    The spirit is good. Unfortunately we are but flawed creatures. Things invariably go wrong even with the best of intentions. I am just afraid that a law like this will lead to unforeseened consequences. I cannot tell you what that might be, because they are "unforeseened."

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    As per Net neutrality rules, how is that not illegal?
    Merchants can't charge more for credit card use. But cash discount is not illegal. So prices go up. In the end, the people these laws aim to protect are the ones paying the price.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    First of all, many merchants penalise for credit cards usage unless there is a minimum purchase. I don't see any "forbidden by law" Second, only prices of credit card transactions went up and since the poor use cash, well they are not affected. Right?
    So merchants ARE charging more for use of credit cards, and everything is legal, even though it is not.

    The very poor use cash. Those who live paycheck to paycheck use credit cards, and always carry a balance. The rich don't really care all that much. The extra fee is a small percentage of their overall income.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    If Comcast blocks Netflix, Gmail and Facebook tomorrow, where are you going to go? Verizon? AT&T?
    Why would it? You're not thinking like a business. Comcast or Verizon won't block something because it uses a lot of bandwidth. It will block or throttle other things to facilitate Netflix or Youtube, if they pay to have priority to access the network. At least that's how I understand the concern.

    This law won't do anything but to add an additional regulation hurdle for business to overcome. The government will sue or threaten to sue down to the last of our tax dollars. Businesses either fight it by sacrificing profit or increases prices. Or go out of business. We lose in the end. Always.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    If Comcast blocks Netflix, Gmail and Facebook tomorrow, where are you going to go? Verizon? AT&T?
    Let me see... Cinema, another mail service, pub.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  5. #20
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,926
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    The spirit is good. Unfortunately we are but flawed creatures. Things invariably go wrong even with the best of intentions. I am just afraid that a law like this will lead to unforeseened consequences. I cannot tell you what that might be, because they are "unforeseened."
    This is exactly the kind of knee-jerk, informationally light, generic, ideological decision making that would make you go bananas, if you were on the other side. "Guns cause death, so lets ban guns, lets ban assault weapons, lets ban everything because of unforeseen consequences".

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Merchants can't charge more for credit card use. But cash discount is not illegal. So prices go up. In the end, the people these laws aim to protect are the ones paying the price.
    I am not talking about merchants accepting cash I am asking you to explain the following:

    The same way they throttle traffic or block traffic from "non-preferred" content providers.
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    So merchants ARE charging more for use of credit cards, and everything is legal, even though it is not.

    The very poor use cash. Those who live paycheck to paycheck use credit cards, and always carry a balance. The rich don't really care all that much. The extra fee is a small percentage of their overall income.
    You specifically said that giving cash discounts would make the life of the poor difficult. How?

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Why would it? You're not thinking like a business. Comcast or Verizon won't block something because it uses a lot of bandwidth. It will block or throttle other things to facilitate Netflix or Youtube, if they pay to have priority to access the network. At least that's how I understand the concern.
    I am thinking exactly like a business.

    Comcast has several good reasons to throttle video streaming services. I used to be a Comcast cable customers. I am not now, I can get movies and tv shows over Hulu and Netflix and regular news from local channels using a cheapo internal/ external antenna. If Netflix is throttled I might go back to being a cable customer.

    Also, Comcast promises everyone a certain speed and bandwidth without having to deliver the sum total of that capability. On the average people do not use their capacity. If everyone starts actually using their capacity, the providers would have performance issues, as they simply have not built that capacity and do not plan to do so. By throttling, they can manage that.

    And lets not just theorize when we have actual data. Comcast is on record as having done some throttling: Comcast blocks some Internet traffic - Technology & science - Internet | NBC News

    Your free market analogy does not help, because there are only limited providers in any area. I have either Comcast or I have to go DSL. So what am I supposed to do if Comcast plays? And I hope you can answer this without going back to the "Internet is not a right" chestnut.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    This law won't do anything but to add an additional regulation hurdle for business to overcome. The government will sue or threaten to sue down to the last of our tax dollars. Businesses either fight it by sacrificing profit or increases prices. Or go out of business. We lose in the end. Always.
    Exactly what hurdle is this? All they have to do is deliver on what they promised without investing in throttling systems.

    Also, are you implying that Comcast is going to go down because they cannot throttle Netflix?

    See, all these are caused by an extremely closed competitive environment. The Cable industry has actively lobbied against new entrants, be it municipal networks or innovations like Google Fiber. Do away with that and Net Neutrality would become a non issue

    AT&T vs Google Fiber
    AT&T says it can block Google Fiber from poles in Austin; city begs to differ - FierceTelecom

    Cable industry lobbies against Muni networks
    Cable co. blames
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Also, Comcast promises everyone a certain speed and bandwidth without having to deliver the sum total of that capability.
    The problem for the industry is they can't charge extra for the increased demand. What their ads did in the past (offering flat rates for peanuts) can now be only sorted via heavy infrastructure investment or slowing the traffic.

    There is another problem which is more worrying and that is blocking a certain domain for whatever reason the service provider has. You might wake up tomorrow and have only 2 sources of information. Oh, wait...
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  7. #22
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,926
    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    The problem for the industry is they can't charge extra for the increased demand. What their ads did in the past (offering flat rates for peanuts) can now be only sorted via heavy infrastructure investment or slowing the traffic.
    Cable providers have increased service quality/ reduced prices in the face of competition such as Google Fiber. They have probably spent more than that to keep competition away in the first place.

    Comcast executive Google Fiber criticism: Americans don’t need speeds | BGR
    Google Fiber: Time Warner Cable exec claims no demand for fast speeds | BGR
    U.S. the leader on broadband - Philly.com

    But after Google Fiber came anyway, they had to respond with new plans and bundles
    'Gigabit Fever' Infects Mississippi As Comcast's WiFi Tango Takes Google Fiber Head On - Forbes

    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    There is another problem which is more worrying and that is blocking a certain domain for whatever reason the service provider has. You might wake up tomorrow and have only 2 sources of information. Oh, wait...
    There you go...
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,926
    To all hankering for ditching Net Neutrality:

    Netflix to pay Comcast for smoother online video streaming - latimes.com

    So now we have Comcast armtwisting Netflix into so that the latter can provide content "other content free of the pauses and hiccups"

    Also, look at the pure disingenuous comment :

    Comcast has promised to abide by the principle of net neutrality — meaning it would treat all online traffic equally and not give preferential treatment to its own video — as a condition of its 2011 acquisition of NBCUniversal. This consent degree, which extends through 2017, would apply to Time Warner Cable if the merger is completed, Comcast has said.
    Basically Netflix will use Comcast pipes exclusively to serve content in these markets.

    Another commentary on the subject:

    Netflix's Deal With Comcast Isn't About Net Neutrality
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  9. #24
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,781
    Net neutrality is a solution in search of a problem.

    Let me show you how providers can get around it.

    "What? I can't throttle the biggest bandwidth hogs of my infrastructure, nor can I charge them more money?"

    "Hmmm....OK, every subscriber will be charged by the volume of data used."

    Net neutrality is upheld. Consumers lose.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  10. #25
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,926
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Net neutrality is a solution in search of a problem.

    Let me show you how providers can get around it.

    "What? I can't throttle the biggest bandwidth hogs of my infrastructure, nor can I charge them more money?"

    "Hmmm....OK, every subscriber will be charged by the volume of data used."

    Net neutrality is upheld. Consumers lose.
    Regardless of Net Neutrality, many services providers already do that. How do consumers lose? Also, if the Service providers love competition and free enterprise so much, why are they up in arms against Google Fiber and Municipal networks?

    By the way, I would rather pay for what I use than give someone the chance to regulate what I use it for.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  11. #26
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,781
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    Regardless of Net Neutrality, many services providers already do that. How do consumers lose? Also, if the Service providers love competition and free enterprise so much, why are they up in arms against Google Fiber and Municipal networks?

    By the way, I would rather pay for what I use than give someone the chance to regulate what I use it for.
    No one is regulating you. It's a scare tactic put out by Netflix and Youtube.

    It's also a way for the government to regulate the internet.

    Government is all about control. Control in any way, shape, or form, is the agenda. That's how the government grows. I'd rather have an evil corporation regulate me than the all benign government.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  12. #27
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,926
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    No one is regulating you. It's a scare tactic put out by Netflix and Youtube.

    It's also a way for the government to regulate the internet.

    Government is all about control. Control in any way, shape, or form, is the agenda. That's how the government grows.

    Lets dispense with the rhetoric and look at what's happening. what does the Comcast/ Netflix deal tell you? What does Verizon's eagerness to get into a similar deal tell you. Who do you think Netflix will pass the costs to?

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    I'd rather have an evil corporation regulate me than the all benign government.
    I am sure you would. Thankfully some of us feel differently. I would rather have more competition than let evil corporations rule the roost
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  13. #28
    Armchair Worrier Senior Contributor bolo121's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Dec 07
    Location
    india
    Posts
    2,087
    GN just wanted to point out one thing: The first thing evil corporations buy is the Government.
    For example here in India Reliance group has all significant MPs in its pockets.
    For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!

  14. #29
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,781
    Another thing, by the time this law, or the fight over this law is done, technology could have left it completely irrelevent.

    For example, the "Fairness Doctrine." It was designed for a time when there were only 3 TV networks and no other form of mass media. It is worthless today in the age of internet. In fact, it provides the government a way to intrude into free flow in ideas and information.

    AT&T anti-trust law suit was during a time when there was only one form of communication. It is worthless now because we have cell phone plus the internet for instant communication. Does anyone still have traditional landlines? I have a landline but it's VOIP. It goes through a cable modem box that's beyond the reach of telephone company.

    How about the fight over Blu Ray and HDDVD? Did it pay off for Sony to have won that war? Technology has moved on. People use...gasp...Netflix now. Should the government have stepped in to ensure there are 2 forms of disc media technology available to the public to prevent a "monopoly" of technology? If it did, it would have wasted a lot of money and time for a problem that didn't exist and never came close to exist.

    Think about it. How long did DVD dominate its market? How about CD? CDs came and went in less than 25 years. Tape lasted longer. Anyone use vinyl any more?

    Technology moves on. It's not practical for government to get too obsessed over regulating it, and especially worrying about the so-called "monopoly" in an arena that it knows nothing about.

    "Monopoly" is an outdated concept from the 19th century. The only true monopoly in today's world is the government. But we can't do anything about it because...the sky will fall if we trim the government.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  15. #30
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,016
    gunnut,

    "Monopoly" is an outdated concept from the 19th century.
    well, i guess you're lucky if you've never had the pleasure of dealing with verizon and comcast. or, for that matter, the company that makes 80% of the world's microchips, or the search engine most of the world uses, or the big social media site the world uses....

    it's not an "outdated concept"; it's a part of capitalism. in fact, for the most part it's the logical progression of capitalism without a vigilant government. Adam Smith, ie the father of capitalism, devotes a considerable portion of the Wealth of Nations addressing this very issue.

    The only true monopoly in today's world is the government.
    ironically this idea is actually much more reminiscent of marxian economic theory than free-market economic theory. it's also reflected in marxist politics, where democratic government is seen as an extended form of capitalist economics/economic-political enslavement.

    it's not an accident that historically, many marxists developed from libertarians and anarchists, and vice versa. the concepts are quite similar in many aspects.
    Last edited by astralis; 27 Feb 14, at 04:11.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Net Neutrality
    By juggernaught in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 15 Oct 14,, 20:35
  2. "Fake Net Neutrality" Scheme Threatens Internet Freedom,
    By Blue in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04 Dec 10,, 00:42
  3. Canadians want neutrality in Mideast policy:Poll
    By smilingassassin in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 13 Aug 06,, 16:51
  4. Assault With A Dead (yes, dead) Weapon
    By THL in forum International Economy
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08 Jun 06,, 22:12

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •