God I feel Sick (Net Neutrality killed by FCC)

oXYnary

Before thinking this has nothing to do with us, it has everything since online games are content creation.

Can't afford to pay Comcast for decent bandwidth? There goes your customer base. :P

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/technology/fcc-new-net-neutrality-rules.html?_r=0

Fuiosg

So corporations are buying the internet now, excuse me while I go give myself a swirly

skyline5gtr

uhhh

Vertrucio

Honda now has to pay extra to the interstate board to allow its cars drive on interstate freeways.

Meanwhile in Europe, net neutrality was put into law along with a lot of other proactive reforms.

I wonder how much it costs to buy a Supreme Court Judge these days. And I wonder if there are any steps left US citizens can take to fight this?

StephenVyas

net neutrality killed by fcc?

After reading the article all i see is a new 'proposed rule', which happens almost every month it seems.

It's good that it's brought up and discussed, but lets be clear that it's not in effect.

oXYnary

Since thats a 180 from their previous position. Its not in effect... yet.* But they want to vote on it by the end of the year.


*Oh wait, it already is in everything but name! You don't remember the Netflix/Comcast deal from a few months back? "Peer Sharing"

Vertrucio

Keep in mind that the supreme court of the US has already struck down the concept of net neutrality. This has already opened up the door for the FCC, or any companies looking to make deals beforehand.

VelvetElvis

This is a bad idea all around. Could you imagine the shitstorm if Microsoft choose Communistcast and Sony chooses, say AT&T, for their preferred internet provider? Who is to say that future COD games can't say you can only play online if you have X internet provider?

If it does pass, I can see a long battle in the courts over this. I can't see any good reason for this and how you can't consider this to allow monopolies to be created.

SnowInChina

Vertrucio wrote: »

Meanwhile in Europe, net neutrality was put into law along with a lot of other proactive reforms.

dont worry, they are trying their best to adept to the US as much as they can
if this passes its only a matter of time before it hits europe
our politicians here are mere puppets of obama and his crew..

Lazerus Reborn

Too many companies in the uk supply internet though. I pay £150/£160 a year for 20mb & pay as you use landline. £130 of that is line rental. I paid the line rental up front to along with a few other tips/tricks to get it reduced so much. I pay £2.50 a month in total without using the phone, for internet.

Talk talk btw.

repete

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q"]George Carlin ~ The American Dream - YouTube[/ame]

praetus

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2148700/under-fire-over-net-neutrality-plans-fcc-seeks-early-feedback.html

fearian

VelvetElvis wrote: »

This is a bad idea all around. Could you imagine the shitstorm if Microsoft choose Communistcast and Sony chooses, say AT&T, for their preferred internet provider? Who is to say that future COD games can't say you can only play online if you have X internet provider?

If it does pass, I can see a long battle in the courts over this. I can't see any good reason for this and how you can't consider this to allow monopolies to be created.

It would never come to heads like this. US service providers have a tactit agreement not to overstep on each other's turf. That why parts of the country are almost exclusively Comcast and other parts are almost exclusively AT&T and so forth. It's alots of 'Local' monopoly so that they never end up being national monopoly. Although even if that happened, I doubt we'd see regulation because these companies seem to be able to push their agenda into politics effortlessly.

iniside

That begs question. Why people in US just won't create their own city networks ?
Or get on board to google, to help them create networks ?

Even if those big companies trying to prevent that I can't believe they would win in court. People in city, create organization that sole purpose is to bring fiber connection to everyone, for as low as price possible.
Trying to prevent this, would be breaking antitrust law.

In EU we have program, that is in the essence is founding Tier 1 network connection to area, and it is up for people in that area to create rest of the network structure in area.
It's not going as fast as it should, but it's better than waiting for any of big providers to build skeletal networtk for their own money.

StephenVyas

iniside wrote: »

That begs question. Why people in US just won't create their own city networks ?
Or get on board to google, to help them create networks ?

:thumbup:

EarthQuake

iniside wrote: »

That begs question. Why people in US just won't create their own city networks ?
Or get on board to google, to help them create networks ?

Wiring a city with internet infrastructure costs millions of dollars, your average person doesn't have the money, the skills, etc.

Also, not enough people understand or care about the issue to take any sort of action (recurring theme in the US). Until its something that affects people's day to day lives in a direct way, its unlikely to have enough of a following that would bring about change.

oXYnary

EarthQuake wrote: »

Wiring a city with internet infrastructure costs millions of dollars, your average person doesn't have the money, the skills, etc.

Also, not enough people understand or care about the issue to take any sort of action (recurring theme in the US). Until its something that affects people's day to day lives in a direct way, its unlikely to have enough of a following that would bring about change.

That and some states have barred the ability for a community to create their own network after pressure from cable companies. As supposedly its not capitalist.

MattQ86

somebody much smarter and more concise than me wrote:

[FONT=Calibri, sans-serif]Entire corporations have completely bought Congress; their lobbyists donate money to electoral campaigns and often serve as major advisers for their politicians, who convince said politicians to deregulate corporations and cut their taxes, while placing the burden on the middle and working classes of America. In exchange for that, the politicians get a large sum of money once they leave politics for good, and even become lobbyists themselves. With the Supreme Court also under corporate payroll, they've made it so that corporations are legally allowed to essentially bribe politicians without repercussions, while making laws that continue to shift the burden on the middle class. Meanwhile, the mainstream media news would distract the public from the real facts, while simultaneously feeding into political propaganda machines to persuade the audiences to take sides in a divide and conquer scenario. Alternatively, the news media may want to portray themselves as "Centrist" or "equal" as possible, in order to form the illusion of bipartisan agreement (CNN, NBC et al, as well as FoxNews for the first bit).[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri, sans-serif]Through a manipulation of politics, ideology, paranoia and discrimination, represented by talk show hosts and news anchors, the corporations' politicians are able to sway a good amount of voters on their side, while making sure that they screw over the people at the same time, discreetly or otherwise. With America's rigid two-party governmental system, the corporations won't allow any independent, third-party alternatives, leaving it as practically an oligarchy or plutocracy. With every Republican actively antagonizing the middle class and most Democrats pretending to be populist, bipartisan, and progressive—while in reality supporting some of the same "voodoo economics" theories as Republicans—the corporations have effectively controlled and influenced politics without much opposition or regression. The only real way to end this is to amend the Constitution to overturn the Supreme Courts rulings that say "corporations are people" and "money equals free speech", which would immediately hurt corporations' ability to buy Congress, and in the long run permanently cripple it, since the Court would no longer be able to overturn campaign finance laws on that technicality. But good luck trying to get 2/3 of each house to pass it and 38 state legislatures to ratify it in less than two years (any longer and the corporate machine will certainly have had the time to destroy ''everyone'' who supported it, killing momentum), much less finding a politician that won't eventually get bought by the corporations. The sad irony of all this is that a number of politicians in Washington have gone on record to say that they really hate hitting up corporate lobbyists for money, because they feel they have much better things to do with their time (like working for the people who actually vote for them), and also they're ego-driven people who like to be in control just as you'd expect from Type A personalities. The big reason they do it is because, in the absence of public financing of campaigns, if they ''don't'', their opponents in the next election most certainly ''will'', and said politician would find themselves unemployed (and unemployable) come the following January.[/FONT]

Honestly the only way for this sort of thing to stop happening is to call for a constitutional convention to get money out of politics. Contact your state's legislators and let them know how this is the most popular policy across not only their party but the country at large.

Xoliul

And the fact that the vast majority of the US population doesn't even realize all of that, is the single biggest tragedy going on these days.

silvershrimp

Many U.K. ISP's already use traffic shaping on specific types of traffic. Have done for years.
EDIT; need to concede that slowing bittorrent, TV streaming and gaming during peak hours is not really the same as essentially charging for net from both the consumer and the content creator for good service.

Mr.Moose

I thought this had already been killed, but it seems it was reopened ;\
will be sending out e-mails and disturbing the MEME spam of facebook and replacing friends feed with some politics
I wish I could do more, but informing people and asking them to act is about all a college student who lives over a thousand miles from DC can do

Mark Dygert

"This is a nice little company you have here. It would be a shame if you failed to protect it properly by not buying bandwidth insurance."

What's bandwidth insura... ((CRACK)) OH MY GAWD MY FINGERS! YOU BROKE MY F****** FIngERs...

"Now. About that insurance."

oXYnary

Just an fyi FCC are meeting about it tommorrow to vote. There is a way to bypass this and the supreme court. Reclassification of broadband. However cable companies are on to it and trying to get congress members to signa letter against reclassification.


Here is a link that will make it easy for you to contact your congress representative to tell them to push for reclassification and ignore the letter.

Call Congress now and tell your rep: Don’t sign that letter!
http://act.freepress.net/call/call_congress_NN_cable_letter/?t=1&referring_akid=4752.8991879.eBVS1m

Here is a link to spam the FCC to not lift restrictions. Better do it asap sinca again its tom.
https://openmedia.org/slowlane?src=156265

Cmon folks pay attention here. Ignoring politics doesn't make it go away.

Justin Meisse

Figured I'd bump this:
FCC Approves Net Neutrality Rules For 'Open Internet'

It's funny reading facebook - between then and now it's been politicized to such an extent that conservatives are comparing this to George Orwell's 1984 and vowing to call it Obamanet.

Vertrucio

Actually, the real effect is something different. While it may preserve some neutrality aspects, apparently the fine print here further increases the telecom's monopolistic hold on the ISP business. Doing things like making it harder for startups and consolidating protected areas for each corporation.

ZacD

I thought this ruling was supposed to protect municipal Internet and make state bans on it illegal.

low odor

Is there another official document other than this:

http://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adopts-strong-sustainable-rules-protect-open-internet

that has more details?


an article regarding the Municipal Internet stuff:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/02/fcc-did-lot-more-just-approve-net-neutrality-today


So the FCC granted petitions to Tenn,and North Carolina to overturn the laws that restricted their municipal project. So, if anything, it is creating an atmosphere of more competiotion? If anyone has a counter point article, I would love to read it.