Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#4390990 - 11/23/17 04:59 AM Net Neutrality or Neuterality?  
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 602
FsFOOT Offline
Member
FsFOOT  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 602
Net Neutrality or will it become Neuterality?

I don' not usually start a thread on a controversal topic like this.
However since the topic is bound to come up anyway, I guess it doesn't matter who starts a thread on it.

And I really am not an expert in this area, I'm not even sure exactly what it will ultimately mean but I do not believe it will be good,

Because the problem is that, as a bit pointed out in this old Linux Journal 2006 article:
Net Neutrality vs. Net Neutering

The end carriers / Cable carriers have a practical monoply.
There is no reason for them to not carve up the juicy portions into a veritable "Thanksgiving Feast" that will become a pay-as-you-go Golden Goose.
Quote
McSlarrow makes sounds that resonate with my libertarian sympathies. I
do worry about the unintended consequences of any legislation that
restricts opportunities for doing business. But...exactly what kind of
business do the carriers wish to pursue freely? The answer shows up in
McSlarrow's last sentence, above. The carriers still think the Net is
about "delivering content to consumers". In other words, Cable TV. They
would like to use the "free market" where they enjoy
government-protected monopolies, to shake down Google, Yahoo, Microsoft
and other large "content providers" for the same favored treatments
their cable systems give ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox and CNN.

The carriers' plan from the beginning has been to convert the Net into a
paid content delivery system--of some kind. That's all they were ever
able to imagine. ..



And who will pay? Us, the consumer of course.

Why? Because if you don't they will not give you whatever; video or service, even filetypes from or websites / services that do not join their monolopy price-club and pay them monthly dividends, etc.

This will I think make huge changes in the way the world works. And will effect economies and stocks, technology, everything really.

I use to believe in the free market stabilizing things by consumer demand and balancing out by what people will sensibly pay.
But not anymore.
There is nothing to prevent the huge conglomerates from becoming complete dictators of internet content and everything that flow of communication at least to the end users.
Just like everywhere in this day and age the ony thing that prevents complete exploitation and dictatorships everywhere in the world is good people who do not let them.

This is simple a batlle again over 'have' and 'have nots'.
I can well imagine this to become another way to create and manipulate people into 'castes' of society.

  • If you are rich you will be in the 'high internet' class. With expensive content to your hearts desire. You would have an Smart-Phone - iphone, ipads, PC, Cable, etc.
  • If you are poor you can't afford that content. Thus you are of the 'lower internet' class. You would have a Dumb-Phone, radio and sneaker-net and little else.


And with education (or even news media or whatever) and employment or denial of it, will the classes cycles created perpetuate themselves?


Anyway what are some thoughts on the topic?


Last edited by FsFOOT; 11/23/17 05:02 AM. Reason: added quote from linux journal page
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4390995 - 11/23/17 07:21 AM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,555
VF9_Longbow Offline
Hotshot
VF9_Longbow  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,555
Tokyo, Japan
The anti-net neutrality legislation must be stopped at all costs. Everyone needs to write to their congress members to show that they do not support this legislation.

The main guy behind this is a former employee of a communications company and is probably still on their payroll. It needs to be stopped in its tracks.

People like us who use sims will suffer. Watch youtube? Your download speed will drop to a snail's pace unless you pay for a special package.

Download big patches or files? Forget about it unless you pay more.

All bad news. This needs to be stopped and laws need to be made to prevent this argument from ever resurfacing in the future. There should probably be a constitutional amendment regarding this issue.

#4391003 - 11/23/17 11:30 AM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,588
462cid Offline
Senior Member
462cid  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,588
USA
As far as I can tell, the end of Net Neutrality means this:

1) A money-grab by making net access a pay-for-content tier system scheme somewhat similar to cable TV. Certain areas of the net will be restricted access based on fees paid and modified by content availability that somebody else decides that you should or should not have.

2) A control of information scheme that supports the pay-for-content tier scheme.

3) A conflict of interest by the creators of the entire idea due to money generated and an abuse of our legal and constitutional systems (in the USA).

Imagine paying 100 dollars a month to just get access to your local library, and then being told that your base membership does not allow you access to this section, that section, and the entire 3rd floor, and by the way, our geographic area no longer offers books that were on the second floor or any book that concerns politics that are considered inflammatory, and politically incorrect content previously at this location is no longer available; that content was voted down after it was tacked onto failed proposition 4573.675% last month, the one about passers-by that don't own pets having to pick up dog crap they see on the sidewalk. Gosh that's too bad we lost that one, but the people have spoken and our republic works via democratic processes, so them's the breaks kid. Please pay 300 dollars to upgrade your membership, and we'll show you the books in the attic... err, well, a selection of them, anyway.


What kind of car is that? What does it matter? When I drive it, I'm Steve McQueen
#4391015 - 11/23/17 03:07 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,618
JohnnyChemo Offline
Member
JohnnyChemo  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,618
Buffalo, NY
Um...no.

This isn't a law, this an FCC policy. The FCC chose to reclassify the internet as a "common carrier" under the 1934 Communications Act. This happened in 2015 after repeated attempts to regulate the net were struck down by the courts as overreach.
Again - "net neutrality" has only been a thing since 2015. For decades prior, the internet was largely left alone and it flourished. Continuing this FCC policy would risk devolving internet service to 1970's era telephone service quality/pricing/innovation.
The telecomms boom that brought us cellular phones, free long distance calling, and choice in phone carriers/plans and equipment was only possible due to the deregulation of telecommunications as well as the breakup of the monopoly Bell system.

Excessive regulation is not your friend, and it is not the friend of innovation, consumer choice, or affordability.

If "the people" truly want this, then let the legislative branch go on record in voting for legislation to do so rather than allowing a rogue administrative bureau craft law and policy on it's political whims.

There should be more concern over the influence Google and Facebook have over content access that ISPs IMHO.

Last edited by JohnnyChemo; 11/23/17 03:10 PM.

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck.”
-Robert Heinlein
#4391016 - 11/23/17 03:18 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: JohnnyChemo]  
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,588
462cid Offline
Senior Member
462cid  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,588
USA
Johnny, is that supposed to be for my benefit?

First I never said it was law. So don't patronize me.

Second, I used an imaginary example of something ("Imagine this"). On the one hand, FCC regulations are part of CFR and last I checked, that's enforceable by law, and on the other, you must also think I foresee that the internet will be accessed by books in local libraries.

I do foresee conflict of interest- due to the people involved- and I do see possible constitutional issues re: 9A or 10A, becasue of how this can potentially restrict information based on affordability.

Would those things happen on Day 1 of the end of net neutrality? Of course not. But they are logical outgrowths. People do stand to benefit monetarily. People do stand to lose at least easy access to information, especially with the push to make all things e-commerce, e-records, etc etc we see from private ventures.




Last edited by 462cid; 11/23/17 03:30 PM.

What kind of car is that? What does it matter? When I drive it, I'm Steve McQueen
#4391021 - 11/23/17 03:28 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: JohnnyChemo]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by JohnnyChemo


If "the people" truly want this, then let the legislative branch go on record in voting for legislation to do so rather than allowing a rogue administrative bureau craft law and policy on it's political whims.


+1


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4391059 - 11/23/17 05:47 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: 462cid]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,618
JohnnyChemo Offline
Member
JohnnyChemo  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,618
Buffalo, NY
Originally Posted by 462cid
Johnny, is that supposed to be for my benefit?

First I never said it was law. So don't patronize me.

Second, I used an imaginary example of something ("Imagine this"). On the one hand, FCC regulations are part of CFR and last I checked, that's enforceable by law, and on the other, you must also think I foresee that the internet will be accessed by books in local libraries.

I do foresee conflict of interest- due to the people involved- and I do see possible constitutional issues re: 9A or 10A, becasue of how this can potentially restrict information based on affordability.



Not necessarily toward you, I've seen net neutrality hysteria all over the internet and much of it portrays net neutrality as a law and there is an implication in much of the propaganda that it has been around forever.

Now as to your hypothetical...let's imagine a different scenario - net neutrality remains in force. You have only one service provider in your region. You will use their modem to access the internet. If you want content from outside of you region, you will pay an extra fee.
You will not see service upgrades in speed or capacity on any regular basis. The modem you are issued will not be upgraded either. Internet service will stagnate.

No way you say? This was precisely the state of telephone communications until it was deregulated in the 80's. Where there was once only one service provider, others came along to provide competition in the market. Long distance fees (out of region content in my example)
dropped immediately, eventually being eliminated and part of standard service. Where you had two styles (wall mount or desktop) of phones in 3 colors (white, black, and beige), you could find phones in all colors, styles and fitting all needs. Now there are a multitude of providers in a variety of delivery methods - landline, cellular, VOIP, serving all areas.

Why on earth would anyone want to regress to this state? Rather than take such a drastic measure, why not wait and see what the market provides? If there becomes a need for government to make a correction then let it do so in a measured response to some market action. Let us not fix what isn't broken. That happens far too often with predictable results.

Quote

Would those things happen on Day 1 of the end of net neutrality? Of course not. But they are logical outgrowths. People do stand to benefit monetarily. People do stand to lose at least easy access to information, especially with the push to make all things e-commerce, e-records, etc etc we see from private ventures.


I disagree. As long as there are multiple providers (something net neutrality, with its costly regulations, will hinder) there will be a choice in pricing in the market. The first provider to go off the deep end on this will wind up paying a price in lost business. The biggest reason for the rapid growth and success of the internet is the lack of regulation.

Remember the Washington proverb -

1. If it moves, tax it.
2. If it keeps moving, regulate it.
3. If it stops moving, subsidize it.

We're on step two, hopefully we can reverse it.




Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck.”
-Robert Heinlein
#4391129 - 11/24/17 10:45 AM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
the fun part will be when people find that in order to have 4k Netfilx they will have to pay more as well to their Internet provider ...

or if that Internet Provider dislikes NYT, WP or SimHQ it may block access to those sites by Bandwidth throttling ...

but it gets even better - it my charge a premium if you want to access any site outside your State

it is a wonderful new world that awaits the customer, enjoy smile

#4391135 - 11/24/17 11:55 AM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,389
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,389
Miami, FL USA
Wrong forum for this topic IMHO.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4391137 - 11/24/17 12:12 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
why ? NETFLIX ?

#4391138 - 11/24/17 12:15 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,389
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,389
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
why ? NETFLIX ?




Hmmm..maybe because it's a political topic that can quickly segue into partisan flame wars?


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4391139 - 11/24/17 12:28 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
not quite - if you like NETFLIX, YOUTUBE, Streaming videos etc. you should be aware that Net neutrality is a must have ... did I mention STEAM ? that consumes a lot of bandwidth as well.

#4391140 - 11/24/17 12:30 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,389
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,389
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
not quite - if you like NETFLIX, YOUTUBE, Streaming videos etc. you should be aware that Net neutrality is a must have ... did I mention STEAM ? that consumes a lot of bandwidth as well.



Not quite? How can this NOT be a political issue when the US Federal government is heavily involved?


And when did I ever mention which side of the issue I'm on?? I don't think you are understanding what I'm saying or you are being intentionally obtuse.

Last edited by PanzerMeyer; 11/24/17 12:30 PM.

“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4391142 - 11/24/17 12:32 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
I am never intencionali obsute.

#4391146 - 11/24/17 12:57 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Online content
Administrator
oldgrognard  Online Content
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
Play nice everyone. Keep it on topic and don’t get into personal mudslinging.

I’ll be watching to see if this needs to get moved.


Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
#4391160 - 11/24/17 02:25 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,618
JohnnyChemo Offline
Member
JohnnyChemo  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,618
Buffalo, NY
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
not quite - if you like NETFLIX, YOUTUBE, Streaming videos etc. you should be aware that Net neutrality is a must have ... did I mention STEAM ? that consumes a lot of bandwidth as well.


If you consume more of something why shouldn’t you pay more?


Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck.”
-Robert Heinlein
#4391162 - 11/24/17 02:42 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
you already do that - to your Internet provider

maybe you should watch this to understand the issues

https://youtu.be/fpbOEoRrHyU

https://www.politico.com/video/2017/11/15/net-neutrality-what-is-it-064313?lo=ap_e1

#4391202 - 11/24/17 06:18 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: JohnnyChemo]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Online content
Veteran
Arthonon  Online Content
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Originally Posted by JohnnyChemo
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
not quite - if you like NETFLIX, YOUTUBE, Streaming videos etc. you should be aware that Net neutrality is a must have ... did I mention STEAM ? that consumes a lot of bandwidth as well.


If you consume more of something why shouldn’t you pay more?

I agree 100%, but I think an issue that comes up with what's being discussed by the providers without net neutrality is that they charge Netflix more, not me. I don't use Netflix, so an increase of their speed does me no good, and yet their feed gets priority over perhaps something else I'd rather have. *I'm* the customer, so why not let me decide what I want to pay extra for? Charging the providers instead of the customers who use the services just seems like a cash grab. It just seems simpler to charge the customers by GB than work out deals with certain providers that then remove the choice from the customer.


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4391212 - 11/24/17 07:28 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: FsFOOT]  
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 19,794
adlabs6 Offline
Veteran
adlabs6  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 19,794
Tracy Island
As I understand, the primary concern over anti-neutrality is some sort of tiered access being cooked up and forced on telcom customers.

I could see this being a problem where there is no competition. This used to happen back when Bell was the only telephone company, and they had very specific maps drawn as to which cities were local and long distance, and many long distance calls were only 3 to 5 miles away. Their map showed that they had made a clear effort to ensure that the neighboring city with major shopping was long distance for every surrounding smaller suburb. And I got charged extra for calling anywhere in that city.

They did this because they could get away with it. But as other phone providers entered the market, another company offered a better plan. Before I could switch, Bell was offering the same thing.

Market pressure took care of it.

I am not clear on why market pressure will not limit or prevent the tiered access internet ideas?


WARNING: This post contains opinions produced in a facility which also occasionally processes fact products.
#4391215 - 11/24/17 08:12 PM Re: Net Neutrality or Neuterality? [Re: JohnnyChemo]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost Offline
Hotshot
GrayGhost  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
It's already paid for.

NETFLIX pays their own ISP.
You as a consumer pay your own ISP.

Why exactly does your ISP want to extract money from NETFLIX for something that you have already paid for (aka the actual bandwidth and speed allocation)

Originally Posted by JohnnyChemo
If you consume more of something why shouldn’t you pay more?


--
44th VFW
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0