It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see and use

page: 17
59
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: imitator

Fact 1: "I need everyone to do two things: share the video and spam people daily!" "Slippery slope with comcast!" "They're going to turn internet into cable tv! Who needs evidence, it makes sense!" "The government will just call up their buddies and tell them to block sites! That's what happens when you get government out of regulating the internet!"

Ok, I'm stopping there because there's so much wrong with this video. This guy is an idiot. He ignores that there are three parties to each internet transaction: Consumer - ISP - Content provider. According to this idiot only the ISP has any power. Unfortunately for his argument, if comcast began blocking a site, said site could sue comcast for unfair trade practices. But let's say it's a small site that doesn't have the resources to sue. Have you ever heard of the FTC? That's why they exist.

Second, cable is an FCC title 2 utility. So labeling ISP's as such, will not stop them from making the internet into a cable package type of service.

Third, his slippery slope argument is completely defeated by the FTC AND the FCC's statements on the issues. Saying we can't trust what they do or say isn't a good argument for why they should control the internet.

Fact 2: "Comcast is evil corporate fascism!" "TV packages" "Censorship."

See my previous response. Is the third video going to be another ill informed talking head? Yep. Plus, if comcast did what he suggests to the humanist report, they'd be sued into oblivion by the FTC and killed by antitrust lawsuits.

Fact 3: That's not even a statement based in reality. The FCC getting rid of title 2 does not give the FCC the ability to prioritize information.
edit on 4-12-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite


Have you ever heard of the FTC? That's why they exist.


I knew it, you didn't watch the video!

Fast forward to 9:30 about the FTC.

Just like the FCC, the FTC is into fixing and regulating special privileges. Plus the FTC could careless about the small guy, they would be filed away in pile of other complaints. A private attorney would be the only hope to protect a small site; which would cost lots of money.

You didn't watch the video, it pretty much defeats everything you said.

Maybe if you watch the video you wouldn't be spouting off nonsense.

youtu.be...



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: imitator

Thats why I said: "Ok, I'm stopping there because there's so much wrong with this video."

And no, it doesn't defeat anything I said. His argument is ridiculous. "government agencies are corrupt! We need them to regulate the internet!" it's stupidity to the extreme.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite

Second, cable is an FCC title 2 utility. So labeling ISP's as such, will not stop them from making the internet into a cable package type of service.



It's not just the Title 2 designation it is a set of rules that requires ISP's to treat all traffic as equal. This means they can't say prioritize their own homegrown streaming service while throttling Netflix and Hulu. If the rules are repealed then they can do that just like they have attempted in the past

Link

Throttling News



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal


This means they can't say prioritize their own homegrown streaming service while throttling Netflix and Hulu.


That would be a great antitrust suit. See, they already can't do what most of you fear mongers think they can. You're just too ignorant to realize it.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: BlackJackal


This means they can't say prioritize their own homegrown streaming service while throttling Netflix and Hulu.


That would be a great antitrust suit. See, they already can't do what most of you fear mongers think they can. You're just too ignorant to realize it.

And what is the attitude of the current SCOTUS towards antitrust suits?



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

They just took the solar city v. salt river project anti-trust suit and the ohio v. Amex suit. So we shall find out.
edit on 4-12-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 08:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite


That would be a great antitrust suit. See, they already can't do what most of you fear mongers think they can. You're just too ignorant to realize it.


I don't think you understand. Before Net Neutrality rules were put in place the ISP's would be completely capable of prioritizing their own traffic over that of a competitor. It the rules were not put in place when they were, Verizon would have moved ahead with their plan.

This is all a way for ISP's to make more money for not doing anything extra. You do realize that they won't offer us any additional products but simply charge us more for what we currently have?



posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 02:49 PM
link   
FCC Head Ajit Pai Jokes About Being Verizon’s 'Puppet' Ahead of Net Neutrality Rollback
Fortune link

Do any politicians understand how this looks to outsiders? Are they (either side) so far in the "bubble" they can't see when they do stuff like this?



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 02:10 PM
link   
This is going to definitely cause havoc on our already fragile economy. I am going to laugh when the big wig ISP charges FCC and other government agencies for their bandwidth to their websites and media. Charge them 5 trillion dollars each for 56k speeds. How do you like that net neutrality now? Make them have a taste their own $h!@ sandwich.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: sean
This is going to definitely cause havoc on our already fragile economy. I am going to laugh when the big wig ISP charges FCC and other government agencies for their bandwidth to their websites and media. Charge them 5 trillion dollars each for 56k speeds. How do you like that net neutrality now? Make them have a taste their own $h!@ sandwich.


Here's the thing, the FTC doesn't actually have the authority to regulate, and what little power they do have AT&T is currently in a lawsuit to remove. The FCC won't have the power either.

The vote went through but NN isn't dead yet, there's four lawsuits the FCC is going to have to successfully navigate to make this happen.
1. They have to prove they acted in the public interest.
2. They have to defend ignoring public opinion, which is 80% pro NN.
3. They're going to have to defend against the 18 states (and growing) which are suing saying the FCC is overreaching authority.
4. They're going to have to defend the clause in their repeal that prevents states from issuing their own NN rules.

The repeal can't be implemented until those lawsuits are settled and they're all major cases. This is going to go until 2018, when NN could be on the ballot if Congress just writes their own regulation. It potentially goes until 2020.

So, today is a day which will live in infamy but it's not the end of the fight yet.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 06:16 AM
link   
So... How are your download speeds this morning, everybody? Mine are slower, but that must be a coincidence, right?



new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join