Net Neutrality and the FCC..... who benefits?

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on May, 15 2014 @ 11:51 PM
link   
Posted here because I am not sure where to put this.

www.washingtonpost.com...


The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday voted in favor of advancing a proposal that could dramatically reshape the way consumers experience the Internet, opening the possibility of Internet service providers charging Web sites for higher-quality delivery of their content to American consumers.


A thought popped into my head and thought I would put it out there.....


Who benefits?

The first thing that popped into my mind was certainly not anyone who uses the internet as their main source of business....and then I thought about a recent story I had read about the amount of subscribers who have been cancelling cable tv in favor of watching on line at various sites.

My theory is that the big internet providers are heavily invested in cable tv and see the internet as a way making up for lost cable income by charging the very sites that you receive it from now... they would have to pay a higher fee for access and they would have to pass the cost to customers to stay in business.

It's a very stupid idea and hopefully it will get killed before it gets very far.




posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Don't really know how this applies but....

I was listening to part of a Glen Greenwald interview this morning on KPFK about some content in the Snowdon papers about the NSA surveillance on citizens being, not about stopping 'terrorists' or 'other criminals' (depending on your definition I suppose) but that their true goal and 'customer' was the private sector. The paper listed 80 some commerical partners that benefited from their commercial espionage operation.

www.democracynow.org...

It's all about profit and closing the door on competetion. Only Big Businesses will be able to afford 'fast' access for their sites - little, new business doesn't stand a chance.

Glen Greenwald also said that THIS (is spying and lying and .... and) cannot stand up to the light....
edit on 16-5-2014 by FyreByrd because: I cannot type nor spell - gee



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 06:02 AM
link   


And we’ve seen that the government is content to violate our freedoms and violate our constitutional rights. So when it comes to who’s the best steward over providing this cheap, fast Internet, I look at the government as being the least trustworthy steward there. I don’t trust the telecoms, either,


If I can afford to pay for Comcast business class internet because I like a fast and wide broadband I should be able to do that. If someone can't afford it then that is their hard luck. It's not cheap, fast Internet they want, it's Free internet they want because it a form of control.

If someone can't afford something-that is not my fault nor am I responsible for providing them with what they can't afford.

These people are just like the ACLU-they hate my guts but that never stops them for begging for donations. They don't want democracy-they want socialism and I know right where they can put their Marxism-exactly where they can stuff it.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 07:20 AM
link   
So large corporations and groups with money could buy most of the internet bandwidth.

It's really cool people see the internet as a medium whose purpose is watching movies and TV.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: spooky24


If I can afford to pay for Comcast business class internet because I like a fast and wide broadband I should be able to do that. If someone can't afford it then that is their hard luck. It's not cheap, fast Internet they want, it's Free internet they want because it a form of control.

If someone can't afford something-that is not my fault nor am I responsible for providing them with what they can't afford.


You are missing the point entirely. It isn't about you being able to pay for more/faster bandwith. It's about mega sites like Amazon, Google, etc paying for PREFERENCE over all other sites in being delivered to you.

An Example: ATS will not be able to pay for prefered rates that Big Box will and will become slow and difficult to get to.

You get it - those site that can pay will be the only ones that work well - all others will get what's left over after advertisers get their exposure.

Here's an anology - Postal Service, Trucking Service - both considered common carriers (as the net should be) - they are not legally able to charge you different rates for 'carrying' an item based on the items worth. A letter that contains a check for a million dollars can be mailed for the same rate as a letter with a check for $1.00. A ton of trash costs the same as a ton of gold to ship (might want more insurance on the later).

More on the subject:

www.dailykos.com...#

www.usatoday.com...

www.peaceteam.net...

LOL - deny igornance - LOL
edit on 16-5-2014 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: spooky24



And we’ve seen that the government is content to violate our freedoms and violate our constitutional rights. So when it comes to who’s the best steward over providing this cheap, fast Internet, I look at the government as being the least trustworthy steward there. I don’t trust the telecoms, either,


If I can afford to pay for Comcast business class internet because I like a fast and wide broadband I should be able to do that. If someone can't afford it then that is their hard luck. It's not cheap, fast Internet they want, it's Free internet they want because it a form of control.

If someone can't afford something-that is not my fault nor am I responsible for providing them with what they can't afford.

These people are just like the ACLU-they hate my guts but that never stops them for begging for donations. They don't want democracy-they want socialism and I know right where they can put their Marxism-exactly where they can stuff it.


It's not about that Spooky. They already do that.

Now the big corps will run the internet like they run the govt. they will pay for so much bandwidth that the smaller "alternative" websites will take forever to load. Essentially crowing them out.
When you look at it. It's really the same model as the corporate lobbyist paying for govt attention, while crowding out the citizenry.

I'm curious. Why spooky? Anyone on ATS knows the obvious implications of the word SPOOK. Just wondering.

VinMan



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd
I replied to Spooky b4 I went on any further. But yeah.





new topics
top topics
 
3

log in

join