This net neutrality move seems a good thing.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Konduit

You don't understand how the internet works, do you? How about filling us in how some up-and-coming ISP trying to provide competitive rates will lay down its infrastructure to provide service.

Ask yourself... was your internet service cheaper before or after Net Neutrality? I think we all know the answer.

Seeing as how Net Neutrality has been a thing since the internet existed there isn't an answer to that question. It was only briefly revoked in 2015 before being reimplemented.

Take a look at Brooklyn Fiber or even Google Fiber.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Konduit

You don't understand how the internet works, do you? How about filling us in how some up-and-coming ISP trying to provide competitive rates will lay down its infrastructure to provide service.

Ask yourself... was your internet service cheaper before or after Net Neutrality? I think we all know the answer.

Seeing as how Net Neutrality has been a thing since the internet existed there isn't an answer to that question. It was only briefly revoked in 2015 before being reimplemented.

Take a look at Brooklyn Fiber or even Google Fiber.

Sounds awesome for Brooklyn. Now let's talk about the small town in southern PA I live in, Stewartstown, PA. Oh yeah, let's not forget either that the reason a startup like Brooklyn Fiber can even get started in the first place is because of the Net Neutrality rules.

Y'all make it sound SO simple for a startup to just get up and start covering areas with internet. Never mind that coverage the country has now has taken damn near 30 years to achieve and there are STILL places in the US without access to broadband. So I'm not buying the "Shop around" line for a second. It just shows an extreme ignorance of how the ISP industry and the internet in general works.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

This upscale argument is flawed. "Where these is a will, there is a way." If the funding, motivation, and most importantly no partisan bickering inhibiting it, we could easily earmark tons of funds to upgrade the internet across the country and make it a public utility. We should start with any money earmarked for that wall; that would be a much better use of infrastructure improvement funds instead of using it to be a huge asshat to foreigners.

Speaking of the wall, if you think that that wall can seriously be built by Trump, then you best believe that a project like this could be completed too.

I'm sure it can, but with 330 million people there are a lot more opinions and people don't realize just how different each state is. Just look at congress to get an idea...lol

Who is speaking of the wall and BTW F foreigners...lol

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sounds awesome for Brooklyn. Now let's talk about the small town in southern PA I live in, Stewartstown, PA. Y'all make it sound SO simple for a startup to just get up and start covering areas with internet. Never mind that coverage the country has now has taken damn near 30 years to achieve and there are STILL places in the US without access to broadband. So I'm not buying the "Shop around" line for a second. It just shows an extreme ignorance of how the ISP industry and the internet in general works.

Well, I never said it was simple. In fact it would be quite the struggle. The point is, if you care so much about great ISP service, why don't you create it and provide it instead of demanding others provide it for you?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Just saying that if the wall can be funded or talked about being funded, so can upgrading our internet infrastructure.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Or, and hear me out here, I can fight tooth and nail to maintain internet standards that have been in place since its inception. Internet standards that have allowed the current internet kings to rise to the top while simultaneously allowing room for smaller fish (like ATS for instance) to exist. I like that idea much better. It benefits more than just the area immediately around where I live and would have a MUCH higher chance of succeeding.

Mark my words, this decision WILL bite the Republicans in the ass. Millennials may be hard to politically motivate, but watching them get up in arms from the 2015 attempt to hijack the freedom of the internet just shows that this battle is about to get NASTY. I will be joining my fellow generation in standing up for freedom that people such as you don't respect.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: amazing

I know in some cases that we're over regulated and it's not always good, but the flip side is how do the little guys, you and me, have any say in the matter without, some regulation or some laws helping us out.

The market. You find another option, and if cannot, you create another option.

Doesn't work in most areas. In Vegas you have two affordable options, both Large Cable/Telecommunications companies. It's like power companies...we only have one here and it's a monopoly and does everything it can to stop you from getting solar panels. Try looking up creating your own ISP and you'll see how hard it is and how much money is involved. You didn't really answer the question.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sounds awesome for Brooklyn. Now let's talk about the small town in southern PA I live in, Stewartstown, PA. Y'all make it sound SO simple for a startup to just get up and start covering areas with internet. Never mind that coverage the country has now has taken damn near 30 years to achieve and there are STILL places in the US without access to broadband. So I'm not buying the "Shop around" line for a second. It just shows an extreme ignorance of how the ISP industry and the internet in general works.

Well, I never said it was simple. In fact it would be quite the struggle. The point is, if you care so much about great ISP service, why don't you create it and provide it instead of demanding others provide it for you?

Who is demanding what?

The ignorance surrounding net neutrality is mind-boggling. It's always existed. It grants a level playing field.

AT&T, Comcast and Verizon, paving the way to allow these internet service providers to speed up some websites, slow down others and charge additional fees for (or block) higher-quality bandwidth-intensive service or even certain content. The federal government will no longer regulate internet service as if it were a utility like phone service.

Ajit Pai, the FCC chairman and former Verizon lawyer and lobbyist, has championed deregulation.

Oh look, more people cheering for a continuation of lobbying in American politics. Surprise.

He has already rolled back limits placed on media ownership, removed limits placed on how much broadband providers can charge businesses, removed privacy protections designed to protect broadband consumers, dismantled a low-income broadband program, and upheld rules that enable phone companies to price-gouge prison inmates.

create tiered pricing plans where every different internet service you want, like low-latency gaming, streaming video, or instant messaging, adds to your bill. Large websites could pay ISPs to slow down new competitors. ISPs could block traffic simply because they want to. Sounds like a pretty bleak future for the Internet, doesn’t it?

I have no idea why anyone would support this.

When Americans realize that InfoWars and porn will no longer be free maybe they'll realize what net neutrality actually entails.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Or, and hear me out here. I can fight tooth and nail to maintain internet standards that have been in place since its inception. Internet standards that have allowed the current internet kings to rise to the top while simultaneously allowing room for smaller fish (like ATS for instance) to exist. I like that idea much better. It benefits more than just the area immediately around where I live and would have a MUCH higher chance of succeeding.

Mark my words, this decision WILL bite the Republicans in the ass. Millennials may be hard to politically motivate, but watching them get up in arms from the 2015 attempt to hijack the freedom of the internet just shows that this battle is about to get NASTY. I will be joining my fellow generation in standing up for freedom that people such as you don't respect.

I always mark your words. According to my scorecard you're still zero for ten. Prediction might not be your forte.

Government regulation is not the answer. Demanding through the government that others conform to our wishes is statist, and thoroughly dangerous to open societies.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

And instead of pretending we live in a perfect world where the market has the power of God, admit how this could cause a wave of price increases across all consumer products and create voters to vote the politicians out and limit and censor information to masses.

I have one provider in my area. One.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If you knew what you were talking about you'd realize you were on the wrong side of history here. It's pretty clear you are arguing this issue minus a full deck of cards and really should go research the history of this issue some more before speaking. Though I know you won't; it's easier to smugly dismiss and pretend like you are right than actually question your own rhetoric.

Government regulation is not the answer. Demanding through the government that others conform to our wishes is statist, and thoroughly dangerous to open societies.

Case in point. You have no idea what you speak. "HERP DERP! All regulation is bad!!!"

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I don't know about brooklyn fiber but even Google Fiber has been struggling with the existing regulations put in place to ensure lack of competition in the teleco world.

Perhaps brooklyn fiber has been able to slip through the cracks for Now because the ISP Oligarch put their attention on the bigger threat which was google fiber?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Or, and hear me out here. I can fight tooth and nail to maintain internet standards that have been in place since its inception. Internet standards that have allowed the current internet kings to rise to the top while simultaneously allowing room for smaller fish (like ATS for instance) to exist. I like that idea much better. It benefits more than just the area immediately around where I live and would have a MUCH higher chance of succeeding.

Mark my words, this decision WILL bite the Republicans in the ass. Millennials may be hard to politically motivate, but watching them get up in arms from the 2015 attempt to hijack the freedom of the internet just shows that this battle is about to get NASTY. I will be joining my fellow generation in standing up for freedom that people such as you don't respect.

I always mark your words. According to my scorecard you're still zero for ten. Prediction might not be your forte.

Government regulation is not the answer. Demanding through the government that others conform to our wishes is statist, and thoroughly dangerous to open societies.

Those pesky statists with their child labour laws and environmental protections.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Just saying that if the wall can be funded or talked about being funded, so can upgrading our internet infrastructure.

I agree why not...just get 50 states to say the same thing...

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I don't know about brooklyn fiber but even Google Fiber has been struggling with the existing regulations put in place to ensure lack of competition in the teleco world.

Perhaps brooklyn fiber has been able to slip through the cracks for Now because the ISP Oligarch put their attention on the bigger threat which was google fiber?

Need to free the market for sure. Net Neutrality repeal would be such a non-issue if we had a free market system and more choices were available.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Just saying that if the wall can be funded or talked about being funded, so can upgrading our internet infrastructure.

I agree why not...just get 50 states to say the same thing...

They did it to form the coast to coast highways and other massive infrastructure projects. It may not seem possible in today's hyper-partisan climate, but it happened in the past. That reasons it can happen again in the future.

a reply to: Xtrozero

They will once it effects their pockets. Maybe even this year. They don't need 50 states just congress majority. Something this unpopular is a disaster.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

They did it to form the coast to coast highways and other massive infrastructure projects. It may not seem possible in today's hyper-partisan climate, but it happened in the past. That reasons it can happen again in the future.

Try building one bridge these days...

They were looking, looking I say, at building another bridge between Portland and Vancouver and the cost of that look before they scrapped the plan was 270 million...lol

If Trump can get on with the overhaul of our infrastructure I think internet should be a key part in all that along with the 60,000 bridges that are structurally deficient. We have moved a long way from just inflation increasing the cost of things that will take about 5 trillion to do what is needed, and I think a big part of that cost will be like my bridge of 270 million just to think about it that in the past of what you are talking about didn't happen.

I thought this was funny. I wonder when the trumps are going to learn that just because they're learning about something for the first time, doesn't mean others don't know about it. It's downright embarrassing.

Also, I wonder if anyone has told him yet that his daddy appointed this FCC chairman. hehe.

Donald Trump Jr.
✔ @DonaldJTrumpJr


I would pay good money to see all those people complaining about Obama’s FCC chairman voting to repeal #NetNeutality actually explain it in detail. I’d also bet most hadn’t heard of it before this week. #outrage

6:38 PM - Dec 14, 2017

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Beavis! You've got to start consulting someone other than Butthead before you tweet, buddy!

a reply to: Xtrozero

Well we are in agreement there. Our nation's infrastructure is in the toilet.