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.

 

This net neutrality move seems a good thing.

page: 21
25
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: ScepticScot
Net neutrality did not in anyway give power over the internet to the UN.



Actually it did...

Don’t you remember all the NWO globalist laws and regulations the UN put in place the last 2 years...

It was front page news on didnothappen.com

Until they shut the site down to cover up all the globalist laws they implemented.



Darn those sneaky globalists.


Yup. We all need to go back to sleep...it's in our dreams that we fight them!




posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
You have clearly not read the thread.

Of course I did not read the entire 20 pages.
Where was I wrong. Point it out instead of making lame comments.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheScale

originally posted by: intrptr
Free roaming of the whole internet will be reorganized to tiered packages of access, the more you want to surf and participate, the more it will cost. The bottom tier, (Basic service package) will limit the user to channel surfing only, commercial ads, comments disabled, censorship to g or pg rated videos and content, just like on cable tv. You can change channels, scroll, mute the commercials and pay for a whole bunch of channels you will never watch.

Good thing huh?

Censorship, a 'good' thing...



lol and going over the top beyond rational must also be a "good" thing to you. the sky isnt falling. at best youll miss out on netflix, hulu or some other streaming service as they negotiate a deal with the isp just like u see with television companies like direct tv and comcast these days when some channel or another doesnt feel like paying the rate they are charging.


Keep telling yourself that.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nwtrucker

I know what the land before interwebz was like. I wont have as much problem returning to the 'good ol' dark ages.

Todays younger set... are gonna freak. Maybe they'll revolt.

About time.


Business won't be effected...

No businesses rely on the Internet.



You mean like Amazon?

Or your local Best Buy?

Or Uber? Or your local mom-and-pop coffee shop that uses one of those Square registers to take your credit card number? Or local food businesses using credit card machines connected to the Internet?

Or game companies (I play World of Warcraft, and you bet your tootie they'll be affected!)

And what about conveniences such as being able to buy movie tickets online or register for a doctor's appointment online...and getting the lab test results online (maybe you don't but many do.)

Or having to take an hour to download a video or a paper you want to research?

There will be huge impacts, and the ones feeling the pinch are going to be small businesses and people who aren't wealthy. The rest will pay a premium and sail on through. Small towns will get the short shrift, and small school systems will struggle.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: Aazadan
You have clearly not read the thread.

Of course I did not read the entire 20 pages.
Where was I wrong. Point it out instead of making lame comments.


It's been pointed out already and rehashing these points bogs down discussion. If you want some cliff notes, check my responses to nwtrucker, they're around pages 10-12 and 19-21.

The gist of it is that Net Neutrality has existed since the internet became a thing, parts of it were repealed in 2008? It's not some Obama mandate. Obama doesn't know the first thing about how the internet works, and neither does Trump for that matter. The Obama era rules shouldn't have been necessary but they were because of what Verizon was doing at the time, which was attempting to repeal some existing rules. This recent change didn't just reverse the 2015 decision but was also a rollback of those rules.

The bottom line is that while the theory holds that this could be a good thing for consumers if there was competition, there isn't actually any competition out there, and competition is actually impossible. Even ignoring all of the economic challenges in creating a competing ISP most towns have signed 30-100 year exclusivity agreements which legally prevent competition.

I think the ideal that we want to go back to, is the situation we had with dialup. 10's to 100's of ISP's available to everyone, wherever they lived. We cannot do that though unless we classify internet as a utility (which comes with title 2 classification) and break up the telecommunication companies so that the owners of the network don't also supply the content.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: TheScale

originally posted by: intrptr
Free roaming of the whole internet will be reorganized to tiered packages of access, the more you want to surf and participate, the more it will cost. The bottom tier, (Basic service package) will limit the user to channel surfing only, commercial ads, comments disabled, censorship to g or pg rated videos and content, just like on cable tv. You can change channels, scroll, mute the commercials and pay for a whole bunch of channels you will never watch.

Good thing huh?

Censorship, a 'good' thing...



lol and going over the top beyond rational must also be a "good" thing to you. the sky isnt falling. at best youll miss out on netflix, hulu or some other streaming service as they negotiate a deal with the isp just like u see with television companies like direct tv and comcast these days when some channel or another doesnt feel like paying the rate they are charging.


Keep telling yourself that.


keep coming up with great arguments. do u not remember why net neutrality was rolled out to begin with? its cause comcast, cox, etc wanted to charge netflix, youtube, hulu etc, that use over 65% of the total internet bandwidth. your rate increase wont be to the isp but instead to those services



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

It was sarcasm.

Meaning it goes well beyond browsing for porn or netflicks.

I am partners in a biz that does mobile inspections for fleet vehicles. I can't have my provider throttling my connection because I have a competitors website to upload to.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: interupt42

I'm off on the political ramifications of this and I wonder if this is a 'quid pro quo' between Trump and the Republican Legislature to get tax reform passed......


To be honest if they were trading tax reform that was a flat tax then it might be worth it . However as long as the tax plan continues to be like it is today and based around thousands of legalese for deductions than its not worth the compromise.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: TheScale

Comcast is an isp.

Also your wrong. The isp can throttle your service, content, etc..Verizon can say meh no go daddy for you. As was already said.

Check out the court cases. Thy already did it.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: Aazadan
You have clearly not read the thread.

Of course I did not read the entire 20 pages.
Where was I wrong. Point it out instead of making lame comments.

Nothing you've said suggests you have any knowledge of the issue, so everything you've said so far has been totally off the wall.

Can you explain why net neutrality which, as I and others explained, has been with us since the inception of the internet, gives the government total control? And how revoking it will save the internet from government control?
edit on 15-12-2017 by EvilAxis because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: TheScale

Comcast is an isp.

Also your wrong. The isp can throttle your service, content, etc..Verizon can say meh no go daddy for you. As was already said.

Check out the court cases. Thy already did it.




ok you need to go reread. your agreeing with what i said. yes if say comcast wanted to charge godaddy a fee cause of the bandwidth then yes they could throttle it or completely block u from the site if they wanted to until godaddy pays the fee, or like u see with television service the customers raise a storm with their provider over the lost channel that is going through negotiations and through the free market get the company to try and get something done. the biggest issue that is not being addressed that would fix any fears anyone has is to break up the monopolies these isp's have in markets. i completely disagree with the OP that there are plenty of options out there. in my area which is the capitol of the state and a large city we have options but none of them are on par with each other. top tier is comcast with high bandwidth low latency internet, next is at&t with "high speed" internet, which is not high speed internet and only delivers 10% the bandwidth comcast has. then we have 4g from cell companies which isnt terrible but has 25gig limit then u get throttled to 600kbps. or u have satellite which is terrible in all ways and has data caps aswell. if we had a plethora of choices that all matched what comcast has or atleast close the rollback would only push the good companies tot he forefront. the ones who promise to never raise rates on competitor sites, throttle, or block u from websites would flourish in the free market



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: TheScale

What you just explained is why we need to treat the internet as a utility. Specifically, break it up into the same way we model communications equipment. There's the owners of the network who physically own and maintain the grid, and charge for access to it. Then there's the service providers who buy space on said grid, and sell their bandwidth to customers.

That is not what we have, and not what we've had since the move away from dial up internet. It's what we ultimately need to get back to though. These recent changes are a step away from that direction.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Scale - your posts are almost impossible to read. Please use basic punctuation.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:04 PM
link   
What I don't get is defense for the removal of net neutrality. What in the world is gained by defending the removal? It's as if people feel it's their duty to support Trump and his administration, no matter how pointless or terrible a decision they make.

Removal helps no one but the fat cats. It sure as hell won't help you.. or your business. It will allow censorship of sorts, could increase cost, and throttling of your bandwidth. Even the possibility of this happening is a bad thing. There is no way to spin this to make it a positive. So the defense for it boggles the mind.

One can only hope courts or congress can undo the bribery that has caused this to come to pass, and put back into place reasonable measures to protect consumers and businesses from the biggest ISPs out there.
edit on 15-12-2017 by fleabit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: EvilAxis

Nothing you've said suggests you have any knowledge of the issue, so everything you've said so far has been totally off the wall.



I think this quote below is totally off the wall.


originally posted by: WhatTheory
Bottom line: It's a good thing "net neutrality" is gone. Don't let the government near anything unless you want it destroyed.


The FCC aka Big Brother just voted away on net neutrality... I guess you meant they destroyed the internet...




edit on 17121731pm312017Fri, 15 Dec 2017 22:17:46 -0600 by imitator because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Indeed - this was very much a Government vote, not a People vote.
edit on 15-12-2017 by EvilAxis because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:18 PM
link   
In all fairness, this won't much affect most businesses, most likely. Perhaps in some niche businesses, but by and large, a company with a Comcast or CenturyLink circuit probably won't be affected by the package deals provided to general consumers.

I don't think this will get too far though - it will affect too many interested parties who can turn this around. I think new regulations will be put into place, much to the rage of Trump and Co.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Bottom line: It's a good thing "net neutrality" is gone. Don't let the government near anything unless you want it destroyed


Explain what exactly net neutrality was destroying. Who were those regulations hurting? I mean.. aside from your largest ISP providers.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: TheScale

What you just explained is why we need to treat the internet as a utility. Specifically, break it up into the same way we model communications equipment. There's the owners of the network who physically own and maintain the grid, and charge for access to it. Then there's the service providers who buy space on said grid, and sell their bandwidth to customers.

That is not what we have, and not what we've had since the move away from dial up internet. It's what we ultimately need to get back to though. These recent changes are a step away from that direction.


yup and if we can fix that aspect net nuetrality becomes a moot point really. i just wish more people would focus on those issues cause then we can start moving forward and fixing the real problem
edit on 15-12-2017 by TheScale because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit

Bottom line: It's a good thing "net neutrality" is gone. Don't let the government near anything unless you want it destroyed


Explain what exactly net neutrality was destroying. Who were those regulations hurting? I mean.. aside from your largest ISP providers.


while it did hurt them should we honestly say that a for profit company cant charge others for the services they use? this is where it gets iffy for me because i dont think the burden should be laid at the feet of the isp's entirely. the govt essentially said, you have to provide the services and everything that goes with it from the hardware to the employees so this company who u have no affiliation with can offer their service for a profit over the infrastructure u pay for and maintain. best example i can give is your disney land and universal studios opens up just next to your property and the only entrance to their park is through disneys property on the streets they have to pay and maintain and not only that but universal studios customers get to also use disneys parking lot aswell. its not exactly right, which leads me to my main point. maybe we the people should own the backbone that is the internet. only thing that frightens me is that means the govt will be responsible for maintaining and updating that infrastructure and id be willing to bet my house that the govt would in no way maintain and update it at the rate that the free market can and ultimately wed all end up with crappier net then we have now and wed probly pay more in taxes per month then we do to an isp atm. ifd youve ever wondered why your isp bill is so high compared to services like netflix, hulu, etc its cause the isp's were having to foot the entire cost of the infrastructure which they then pass on to us the customer.
edit on 15-12-2017 by TheScale because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
25
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join