Jump to content

Net Neutrality

Incredulity

By Incredulity
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12847

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

The complete bullshit leftists spewed about the, “end of the internet”.

Take the loss, pussy.

Thats a nice strawman you got there.

So you claim that throttling hasn’t been happening, I present direct evidence to the opposite. You claim victory. Interesting way your brain works, or I guess, doesn’t.

Edited by hobbes2702
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11555

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Direct evidence of a singular situation from 3.5 years ago which Verizon directly denied was related to NN. 
 

I realize in leftist fantasy land everything is given away “fairly” according to ones “needs”.
 

The fire department in that case signed up for a plan that throttled data after a certain amount of usage.  It wasn’t arbitrary.

 

So again, anything relevant or remotely relating to the pending internet catastrophe foretold by leftists in 2018?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12847

Posted
Posted (edited)

You really do love strawman.

Actually not singular. Every single carrier has been throttling since the repeal. So again you are an uninformed moron carrying water for massive telecommunications companies. Weird hill to die on for sure.

https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/09/10/new-research-shows-your-internet-provider-is-in-control/

 

Weird how you ignored your location being sold? So you’re supportive of that?

Edited by hobbes2702
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12847

Posted
Posted

Yes I definitely pivoted by refuting your throttling assertion directly with a study from Northwestern and UMass. Nice attempt to deflect though. So any response to every carrier throttling data? Any response to them sharing your location data? Those are both things that Net Neutrality would defend you against.
It’s interesting how privacy seems to be super important for y’all when it comes to vaccines but you’re ok with telecoms selling precisely where you are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12847

Posted
Posted
Just now, Incredulity said:

Yup, those 2018 studies are incredibly compelling.  I’m sure a problem of this magnitude has serious ongoing research as well….? No?  Interesting.

 

And, the topic of location privacy is absolutely a pivot from the topic of NN.

Ok big guy. Location privacy is not a pivot. Net Neutrality regulations were what made your location data private. Without NN telecoms are free to sell your location to the highest bidders. And they have. 

Incredulity : look no throttling

study showing every major carrier throttling users

incredulity: take the loss pussy.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11555

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

Net Neutrality regulations were what made your location data private.

Donald Trump GIF by Election 2016
 

Later 2016 FCC rule making, not the 2015 NN rulings made it so consumers could opt in to privacy.

So again, a pivot.

Throttling has been the topic of this thread since 2019.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12847

Posted
Posted

You know you’re right it was a separate ruling that’s part of the same problem.

Throttling has been the topic, and throttling data is notoriously hard to come by since carriers don’t have to release that information thanks to the FCC. Oh and shockingly enough when researched and studying they all did it. But I’m sure telecoms in their infinite love of their consumers just stopped doing that because reasons.

Im honestly not sure why you want to carry water for telecoms, or why anyone would oppose net neutrality at all really, but you’ve proven over that this fight is all about what your team tells you to think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...
Foosters

Foosters 17734

Posted
Posted

https://www.reuters.com/technology/internet-providers-end-challenge-california-net-neutrality-law-2022-05-05/?utm_source=reddit.com

Quote

The U.S. broadband industry ended late on Wednesday its legal challenge to California's landmark net neutrality law, which seeks to protect the open internet.

A group of industry associations that represents major internet providers, such as AT&T Inc (T.N), Verizon Communications (VZ.N), Comcast Corp (CMCSA.O) and others, dismissed their 2018 legal challenge.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had last month refused to reconsider a ruling upholding the 2018 state law, which bars internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic or offering paid fast lanes.

"Following multiple defeats in court, internet service providers have abandoned this effort to block enforcement of California's net neutrality law," California Attorney General Rob Bonta said Wednesday.

The industry associations that had challenged the law said in a joint statement that "broadband providers are united in support of an open internet." They committed themselves to working with Congress and the Federal Communications Commission to develop a federal approach for resolving the issues.

In January, the appeals court ruled 3-0 that a 2017 decision by the FCC to reverse federal internet protections could not bar state action, rejecting the industry challenge.

Andrew Jay Schwartzman, a senior counselor at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society said, "the end of this litigation is a boon for free speech, competition and innovation on the internet."

The appeals court said that, since the FCC had reclassified internet services in 2017 as more lightly regulated information services, the commission "no longer has the authority to regulate in the same manner that it had when these services were classified as telecommunications services."

A lower court judge refused to block California's net neutrality law from taking effect after the Justice Department withdrew its separate legal challenge to California's state law in February 2021 - just days after Joe Biden took office.

The FCC under former President Barack Obama adopted net neutrality rules in 2015. They were overturned in 2017 by the FCC under then President Donald Trump. California's legislature responded by adopting a state law requiring net neutrality in August 2018.

The FCC remains divided 2-2, because Joe Biden's nominee for the final commission seat, Gigi Sohn, has not been approved.

Supporters of net neutrality rules argue the protections ensure a free and open internet. Broadband groups contend the rules' legal basis from the pre-internet era is outdated and discourages investment.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31283

Posted
Posted

Well, it does appear that, several years into it, throttling is not a widespread, impactful issue.

Yet.

In the meantime, it appears that content providers have come down to earth a bit and cord-cutting is a less compelling option than it once was.

So the nightmare scenario of discrimination by bandwidth among providers doesn't seem to have come to pass.

I  think that's a happy accident rather than evidence of benign intentions by ISPs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27467

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, it does appear that, several years into it, throttling is not a widespread, impactful issue.

Yet.

In the meantime, it appears that content providers have come down to earth a bit and cord-cutting is a less compelling option than it once was.

So the nightmare scenario of discrimination by bandwidth among providers doesn't seem to have come to pass.

I  think that's a happy accident rather than evidence of benign intentions by ISPs.

I do think that the years of WFH'ing during COVID also caused the ISPs to realize their bluff had been called. Through the pandemic while on nonstop video calls and uploading/downloading data, projects, and slide decks I imagine that baseline data consumption increased at least 2-3x.

It's patently and empirically false that there's any sort of bandwidth constraint on ISP networks. I don't think that they think that they could withstand the public backlash right now if they were to try it again

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31283

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I do think that the years of WFH'ing during COVID also caused the ISPs to realize their bluff had been called. Through the pandemic while on nonstop video calls and uploading/downloading data, projects, and slide decks I imagine that baseline data consumption increased at least 2-3x.

It's patently and empirically false that there's any sort of bandwidth constraint on ISP networks. I don't think that they think that they could withstand the public backlash right now if they were to try it again

Good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16861

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I do think that the years of WFH'ing during COVID also caused the ISPs to realize their bluff had been called. Through the pandemic while on nonstop video calls and uploading/downloading data, projects, and slide decks I imagine that baseline data consumption increased at least 2-3x.

It's patently and empirically false that there's any sort of bandwidth constraint on ISP networks. I don't think that they think that they could withstand the public backlash right now if they were to try it again

I believe they were busy lobbying and passing laws restricting municipalities from circumventing the need for the slower more expensive telecom offerings.   Have faith, their spots have not changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
Captainant

Captainant 27467

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Another year, no throttling.

I’m sure it’s just around the corner.  Right?

What evidence are you basing this on? Because in the barest, most technical sense you're correct - but ISPs do things like force you to their DNS and CDN servers by hard coding it into the modem, which does measurably impact performance. Sure, you can buy and configure your own edge router to do it properly, and then it's pretty fuckin nice to have fiber gigabit (just saying), but 95% or more of their customers probably won't do that. 

Because there's no privacy rules or neutrality rules in place, the ISPs can harvest your raw traffic data and sell it to advertisers (or literally anyone who's buying) and do shitty things like injecting additional ads into pages, which is also a significant security risk on top of everything else. Oh also, the ISPs don't have to report data on throttling, so of course there's """no throttling""". Why the fuck would they out their own sheistyness?

 

I really don't understand your hate for net neutrality. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26285

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Incredulity said:

My hate is for all the leftist simps who declared the repeal of NN, “the literal death of the internet”.  

 

That didn’t fucking happen. Now you want to pivot to privacy concerns.  

When was privacy not part of the argument? You're pretty clearly way out of your depth on this.

Nice CR post, though. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Pods

Pods 7530

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Side wide search results for "the literal death of the internet" 

1 result.

Incredulities post #175 on this page.

Weird that I don't see any results for all those leftist simps supposedly posting this. Just a single far right mouth breather who doesn't understand how quotation marks work. 

Image 5-20-23 at 4.13 PM.jpeg

  • Like 3
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
0xdeadbeef

0xdeadbeef 1626

Posted
Posted

Serious question, are the folks here that are for "net neutrality" referring to something to enforce the the ideas and core principles of net neutrality, or are they wanting the return of the FCC 2015 Order that placed ISP as Title II common carriers?    The two are not the same.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4044

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Captainant said:

What evidence are you basing this on? Because in the barest, most technical sense you're correct - but ISPs do things like force you to their DNS and CDN servers by hard coding it into the modem, which does measurably impact performance. Sure, you can buy and configure your own edge router to do it properly, and then it's pretty fuckin nice to have fiber gigabit (just saying), but 95% or more of their customers probably won't do that. 

Because there's no privacy rules or neutrality rules in place, the ISPs can harvest your raw traffic data and sell it to advertisers (or literally anyone who's buying) and do shitty things like injecting additional ads into pages, which is also a significant security risk on top of everything else. Oh also, the ISPs don't have to report data on throttling, so of course there's """no throttling""". Why the fuck would they out their own sheistyness?

 

I really don't understand your hate for net neutrality. 

He does not either. It’s hard to understand one’s own hatred of an issue when they don’t even understand the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
0xdeadbeef

0xdeadbeef 1626

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, Captainant said:

I really don't understand your hate for net neutrality. 

NN is a great concept and a terrible FCC order; both are referred to as NN.   The FCC order is a poster child for the wrong way to do things.  It pulled ISP under Title II of the Telcom act of 1996, but the FCC claimed they were only going to selectively apply it.   FCCs words were "light touch" (Quotes are theirs).    You are subject to a giant law, but only the parts we see fit; those taxes listed in the law? oh don't worry about them, we'll never apply them.

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

https://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.pdf

Free the Internet by regulating it via an old law that doesn't really apply. This was a terrible Order; it needed to be repealed.

Now do you understand?  It's really not that hard. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27467

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

NN is a great concept and a terrible FCC order; both are referred to as NN.   The FCC order is a poster child for the wrong way to do things.  It pulled ISP under Title II of the Telcom act of 1996, but the FCC claimed they were only going to selectively apply it.   FCCs words were "light touch" (Quotes are theirs).    You are subject to a giant law, but only the parts we see fit; those taxes listed in the law? oh don't worry about them, we'll never apply them.

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

https://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.pdf

Free the Internet by regulating it via an old law that doesn't really apply. This was a terrible Order; it needed to be repealed.

Now do you understand?  It's really not that hard. 

I think we're talking past each other here. You have beef with specific policy - policy that is decades old and older than 99% of the network architecture and internet writ large. I don't disagree that we need to update the rules and definitions behind NN, but I don't know how you could have a problem with requiring ISPs to treat and rate all traffic at the same level. THAT is the essence of net neutrality. 

Your electrical provider shouldn't be charging you more for using a 1000w GE microwave vs a 1000w Kenmore - they use the same amount of power. An ISP should not be able to charge more for 1GB of traffic from surly than they do for 1GB of traffic from texags. It's all a common utility. It's literally a defining quality of the architecture of the internet 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89450

Posted
Posted

Making another run at it.

https://www.fcc.gov/document/chairwoman-rosenworcel-proposes-restore-net-neutrality-rules

Quote

“In the wake of the pandemic and the generational investment in internet access, we have a window to update our policies to make sure that the internet is not only open, but fast and fair, safe and secure. I am committed to seizing this opportunity. Now is the time for our rules of the road for internet service providers to reflect the reality that internet access is a necessity for daily life. Let’s get to it.” – FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel.

Overview

The internet is too important to our society and economy not to have effective oversight. However, in 2018, the FCC abdicated its authority over broadband and repealed net neutrality. Today, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel shared with her colleagues a proposal that would begin the process of re-establishing the FCC’s oversight over broadband and restoring uniform, nationwide net neutrality rules, which would allow the FCC to protect internet openness and consumers, defend national security, and advance public safety.

What is being proposed

The Chairwoman is proposing the FCC take the first procedural steps toward reaffirming rules that would treat broadband internet service as an essential service for American life. As work, healthcare, education, commerce, and so much more have moved online, no American household or business should need to function without reliable internet service. This was especially true during the pandemic. Such rules would affirm—under Title II of the Communications Act—that broadband service is on par with water, power, and phone service; that is: essential.

The proposed rules would return fixed and mobile broadband service to its status as an essential “telecommunications” service. The proposal will be made public and will allow for public input. The proposal seeks to largely return to the successful rules the Commission adopted in 2015.

How It Helps Consumers

  • · Openness – Establish basic rules for Internet Service Providers that prevent them from blocking legal content, throttling your speeds, and creating fast lanes that favor those who can pay for access.
  • ·Security – Reclassify broadband internet access to give the FCC and its national security partners the tools needed to defend our networks from potential security threats.
  • · Safety – Allow the FCC to enhance the resiliency of broadband networks and bolster efforts to require providers to notify the FCC and consumers of internet outages.
  • · Nationwide Standard – Establish a uniform national standard rather than a patchwork of state-by-state approaches, benefiting consumers and Internet Service Providers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...