This net neutrality move seems a good thing.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Yes, the leftists, even those in this site, don't want to admit that it was the Obama administration, with the blessings of messiah Obama, that gave ICANN control over the internet. One of the countries which is a large shareholder of ICANN is China. Recently i made a thread about the move that China made after Obama gave ICANN control of the internet...

Here is an excerpt about what the Chinese government ICANN now do thanks to Obama which the left is leaving out in their arguments...

China’s official military website announced the launch of the platform on Sunday, which is supposed to maintain a “clear internet space” surrounding the military. Any person, both publicly and anonymously, can issue an online report on various violations, including those published on websites or social media platforms. The possible violations include fake news about the military, leaked secrets, and “distorting headlines.”

The spreading of “harmful” information about the Chinese Army, including attacks on the party’s leadership over the army and distortions of its history or that of the Communist Party, can also be reported on, as well as illegal Internet access of military personnel without permission of higher military staff.

The launch of the official website comes just one month after Chinese President Xi Jinping, in a historic speech at a Chinese Communist Party meeting, vowed to turn the People’s Army into a “world class force” in 30 years, and ordered full modernization by 2035. Xi also mentioned strengthening “guidance, influence, and credibility of the media” and building “a system for integrated internet management to ensure a clean cyberspace,” a part of which could be the newly-introduced platform.
...

www.rt.com...

Chinese military launches website to rat on leaks, violations & fake news

China is following suit on the moves the leftards in the U.S. are using to this day by claiming "fake news" in their attempts to restrict, and ban websites and content that leans to the right, and dares not kowtow to left-wing [snipped]

By giving ICANN control of the internet, they are allowing ICANN's large shareholders the ability to censor news that "leftists around the world" want censored...

originally posted by: interupt42

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.

All I know is me and mine gain from it. If it leaves more money in the private sector more money will be generated into Federal reserves. always has.

Another thought is Trump needs the stock market to continue to rise. That's his biggest PR point and the higher it goes the bigger the fear of a crash if tax reform doesn't go through. I'd assume the market responded well to this news...

If anyone doesnt like the Internet as it is, they can always build another one.

originally posted by: Skyfloating
If anyone doesnt like the Internet as it is, they can always build another one.

so they would be, bill gates, richard branson, mark zuckerberg, or jeff bezos? not many people with the billions needed to lay the fiber down along with the entire infrastructure. could be done but at this point its something that requires a worlds effort to reform or one super villian

a reply to: TheScale

Only if you apply currently known methods. That's the beauty of the free market.


I understand the argument however. The biggest issues being the same ones that hold the pipe also want to push their own programming. It was the same with cable, now we have things like netflix, hulu, youtube and the lot.

a reply to: [post=22956190]nwtrucker[/post

Ok, I'm a little less ignorant than a few hours ago when I started this thread.

This is what i've learned-my operating basis has been and is I pay what I'm charged. If I don't like what I'm being charged, I don't pay it- so I had little knowledge of just how many have and likely will take advantage of this move.

History says it has happened and fairly regularly. If you give a dog a bone, he's gonna bury it. Looks like another' bone'.

Very tempting, to say the least. Add in the demands for ever increasing returns quarterly if you want to keep your job and the inevitable will happen. To some degree and at least by some.

However, there is hyperbole in this. If you think free or near free internet was a going to continue indefinitely, your dreaming. Nothing that started free, stays free. Not land, not water, not hunting, fishing, those 'rights' disappeared as well. I don't care who controls it or doesn't control it, prices go up. If free enterprise somehow brings the price down, it's short term and a fluke.

Hell of a lot of car companies these days. See the prices getting cheaper? Me neither.

I don't believe it will get as bad as some claim. Too much power in social media and a hand-wringing gov't that wants re-election and so will likely mitigate the worst of this.

I do now believe that this goes too far in cutting regulation in this arena. It seems most think it will create many more problems than any argue it solves.

I can't logically argue against it.

Bottom line is there is no decision this gov't makes that won't be argued 'too far' or 'not enough'.

I'm sure not going to lose any sleep over it, either way.

Thanks for all the lessons, they are appreciated. Really.

a reply to: nwtrucker

I have yet to see proof about the UN claim rather than speculation and doom. Share your sources. No, because someone from the UN applauded NN doesn't mean they are "in on it", try again.

I read online computer requirements for online classes. 10 meg download. My phone company only offers max of 6 meg but I get 4. Something if lucky download and .3 upload if lucky. Several times recently I got less than 1 meg download and upload died. My service died and customer service was terrible. One week to fix. Told me to be at house all day, technician didn't even make it out. Repeated same second day, called at end of day, problem at office, should be working now technician said.

I'm out of work. Couldn't apply for any jobs online. I have online subscriptions I couldn't use but was paying for. This is how centurylink works in my small town. Only other choices I heard were worse with neighbor saying cable internet drops all the time. I'm ready to drop my phone company to the first company that provides a lot better service. My phone and internet bill is about $85 a month after lots of temporary discounts after I threatened to drop service completely. At least they did that. I can hope for more competition in small town USA but haven't seen much in the past 20 years and giving more power to big companies won't help my situation in my opinion. Bigger cities have many more options, much higher speeds, and cheaper prices. I'd enjoy watching anyone who I disagreed with getting frustrated trying to do something online with slower service than dial up at times.

10 years ago I didn't need the Internet. All I did was web surfing. Now I need it for financial transactions, job searches, email communications, data research, online learning, etc, etc. even running a business. I have an in law that works remotely online. I'm sure several who only casually surf online and don't do any work online, nor pay bills online, nor do anything important online need the Internet yet. In small town USA, I can't do many things without the Internet. I could argue you don't need electricity similar to you don't need Internet. It sure would make living more difficult but I could argue I could survive without electricity. If the whole country lost electricity it's estimated the death rate is 90% after 1 year.

Gas stations don't work. Trucks with food don't run. People starve. Water pumps don't operate. You would have to find a stream or pond to get your daily water if no other choices. Life is a lot harder without services like electricity and Internet.

Removing net neutrality just gave all the power to the big monopolies. Now they can say they won't change anything but I've seen how they operate for 20 years. It's all about the money. If you pay a lot more or live in a big city where they can collect a whole lot more money, you get better service while they screw over service in small towns. Many people would be up in arms if they took off work for a whole day and the tech didn't even make it out for repairs that day after waiting a whole week with no internet. Now if you use too much data online, companies from all monopoles can agree to throttle everyone. Their choice now.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: intrptr

Yep. Lmao.

Cribbage, anyone?

Bah, I have a garage full of books, tools and flea market stuff.

I dig chewing the fat with patrons at flea markets.

It would be better for me if the net did died.

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.

Whaa--?

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: intrptr

It brings to mind an NCIS episode where the computers were down for an extended time. Gibbs brings out a box full of Polaroid cameras. he crew looks stunned. Then having to physically go through a massive number of boxes looking for documents, connections to the case....it was funny.

My favorite old movies scenes are when the phone rings and they get up, cross the room and pick up the handset with a wire attached.

"Hello--?"

originally posted by: Ameilia

originally posted by: VengefulGhost
Have fun paying more for your internet then because it about to get alot more expensive for you over there .
And get used to your content being restricted and censored .

Net Neutrality wasn't a thing before 2015.

And now it's not a thing again.

If we weren't censored and throttled before 2015, why should be now? Exactly what differences have occurred pre-2015 Net Neutrality and post 2015 Net Neutrality that were are now going to lose due to its being repealed?

Excellent post - it amazes me how often I see inaccurate political opinion pieces effectively copied and pasted on to these boards.

Quite simply, under net neutrality, huge companies and bandwidth hogs like Netflix pay the same to the ISPs as the guy who has a single aboutme page. Where do you think the ISPs cover the costs of Netflix??? They have to pass it on to customers, so the Netflix users using huge amounts of bandwidth get subsidised by those that just use the internet for email, checking the news, whatapp, etc. Sure, there are bandwidth tiers, but that is too basic a pricing model to eliminate the subsidies paid by low bandwidth users. By removing net neutrality, Netflix will pay a lot more and users of Netflix will pay more. Others will pay less - i.e. freedom - you get to pay for what you want. It could well be that this leads to FREE internet for millions because the ISPs can make their money from the big corporations and their content consumers, whilst the rest of us enjoy lower prices. If ISPs get greedy, that is where the market comes in and punishes them through competition.

It is ironic that the people against ending net neutrality are actually supporting big corporations paying less and the better off in society getting subsidised by the poor... they tend to be the same people campaigning for higher taxes and more welfare.

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.

Hah, they always say that. I know, I watched the Cable TV get born, mature and die. The internet will too.

Control freaks will take over and censor just like they did TV and cable.

BTW, how many YouTubes you have bookmarked for future reference, but when you go to reference them it says, 'removed, sorry about that' ?

a reply to: intrptr

Content is already censored on the internet. Now companies like Youtube will get severely punished for it, because the decision will be to PAY for it... so such censoring is going to hurt them even more. They stand to lose millions of consumers.

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: intrptr

Content is already censored on the internet. Now companies like Youtube will get severely punished for it, because the decision will to PAY for it... so such censoring is going to hurt them even more. They stand to lose millions of consumers.

Besides that TnCs limit content,

I'm afraid anymore to bring my best expose YouTubes here because invariably , they get removed. The more airtime, the more sharing, the sooner the censors see it and 'poof' , gone.

I had a video about colonialism in Africa removed by mod yesterday from a thread about Africa. It 'went against the grain' .

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: intrptr

Content is already censored on the internet. Now companies like Youtube will get severely punished for it, because the decision will to PAY for it... so such censoring is going to hurt them even more. They stand to lose millions of consumers.

Besides that TnCs limit content,

I'm afraid anymore to bring my best expose YouTubes here because invariably , they get removed. The more airtime, the more sharing, the sooner the censors see it and 'poof' , gone.

I had a video about colonialism in Africa removed by mod yesterday from a thread about Africa. It 'went against the grain' .

...which underlines the emptiness of a charge that removing net neutrality means corporations get to choose what we watch. That is already a major issue, unfortunately. I feel for people like yourself who go to the effort of producing content that people are interested in, just so some little hitler can decide no one should see it.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: intrptr

Content is already censored on the internet. Now companies like Youtube will get severely punished for it, because the decision will to PAY for it... so such censoring is going to hurt them even more. They stand to lose millions of consumers.

Besides that TnCs limit content,

I'm afraid anymore to bring my best expose YouTubes here because invariably , they get removed. The more airtime, the more sharing, the sooner the censors see it and 'poof' , gone.

I had a video about colonialism in Africa removed by mod yesterday from a thread about Africa. It 'went against the grain' .

...which underlines the emptiness of a charge that removing net neutrality means corporations get to choose what we watch. That is already a major issue, unfortunately. I feel for people like yourself who go to the effort of producing content that people are interested in, just so some little hitler can decide no one should see it.

No one decided what people can or on-line (within the limits of the law).

Individual sites can of course limit content which is entirerly correct. The idea that all sites should allow any content us ridiculous.

What the loss of net neutrality does is make it easier for providers to censor content by giving priority to certain sites. Companies that can pay for there content to be provided can restrict competition.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: intrptr

Content is already censored on the internet. Now companies like Youtube will get severely punished for it, because the decision will to PAY for it... so such censoring is going to hurt them even more. They stand to lose millions of consumers.

Besides that TnCs limit content,

I'm afraid anymore to bring my best expose YouTubes here because invariably , they get removed. The more airtime, the more sharing, the sooner the censors see it and 'poof' , gone.

I had a video about colonialism in Africa removed by mod yesterday from a thread about Africa. It 'went against the grain' .

...which underlines the emptiness of a charge that removing net neutrality means corporations get to choose what we watch. That is already a major issue, unfortunately. I feel for people like yourself who go to the effort of producing content that people are interested in, just so some little hitler can decide no one should see it.

No one decided what people can or on-line (within the limits of the law).

Individual sites can of course limit content which is entirerly correct. The idea that all sites should allow any content us ridiculous.

What the loss of net neutrality does is make it easier for providers to censor content by giving priority to certain sites. Companies that can pay for there content to be provided can restrict competition.

Which quite simply means that AT&T can censor as opposed to say, Youtube. Censoring is happening already, and all that happens now is that another company can censor, but at least that will be based on a market model. The current censoring is based, it seems, on a political one and of course, will continue.

As for restricting competition, I don't think so. The Youtubes of this world will have to pay more - and yes they may get a better service for that money, but smaller companies can still grow. If a youtube competitor comes along they will not have to pay as much initially and their content will still be available - as they grow they pay more. Youtube will not be paying to restrict competition - they will be paying because they use more bandwidth.

a reply to: UKTruth

YouTube will be just fine.

What will happen is the consumers will pay more across the board as every business uses the Internet.

For me and a mobile inspection company for fleet vehicles I have to upload data and use ip cams. If I get throttled because my isp is different than the website host it's a problem

How about if Verizon and Comcast sponsor different political campaigns?

originally posted by: dreamingawake
a reply to: nwtrucker

I have yet to see proof about the UN claim rather than speculation and doom. Share your sources. No, because someone from the UN applauded NN doesn't mean they are "in on it", try again.

Neither have I seen any proof. In the OP I asked whether true or false.