Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Net Neutrality thread of this shit is too political for the reg lounge

Net Neutrality thread of this shit is too political for the reg lounge (Page 3)
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2015, 03:40 PM
 
Also, I'm impressed we got this far, though I'm not sure it'll actually affect me personally (unfortunately).

Some good quotes:
“Let’s parse out what they say in their lobbying with us and what they say when they’re talking to consumers,” said Wheeler, a former cable and wireless industry lobbyist himself. While Verizon told the FCC that consumers are satisfied with 4Mbps/1Mbps and that "a higher benchmark would serve no purpose,” they push customers to buy much faster speeds, which cost more, Wheeler pointed out.

“In their marketing materials Verizon says, ‘while FiOS provides a lot of speed for bandwidth hungry devices, you’d be surprised how fast it goes. You can think of your household’s Internet connection like a pizza to be shared with your whole family. Some people are hungrier than others and if too many friends show up no one will get enough to be satisfied.’

This is what their website says,” Wheeler continued. “’25/25 is best for one to three devices at the same time, great for surfing, e-mail, online shopping and social networking, streaming two HD videos simultaneously. 50/50 is best for three to five devices at the same time, more speed for families or individuals with multiple Internet devices, stream up to five HD videos simultaneously.’
“Somebody is telling us one thing and telling consumers another."
It’s not just Verizon. “Consider what AT&T told us in this proceeding,” Wheeler said. “Quote: ‘the notice presents no basis for a conclusion at this time that a service less than 10Mbps is no longer advanced.' But what they say to their customers is, ‘with downstream speeds up to 45Mbps, AT&T’s U-verse high-speed Internet lets you enjoy life in the fast lane, download music, movies and more in record time.’”

...

Wheeler finished with Time Warner Cable, “who says, ‘between laptop, tablets, and smartphones you’ll need all the bandwidth you can get. 15Mbps works for two adults with two smartphones. 20Mbps: one person with a smartphone, a TV and a video streaming device. 30Mbps: a family, two adults, two kids, two TVs, one tablet, two computers, and one on-demand device.'"

TWC also "provides a convenient link on their website where you enter the characteristics of your household and they tell you the bandwidth you need, which is far more than 4 and far more than 10," Wheeler said.
Ether'd
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2015, 04:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
AT&T is out frantically running fiber in my area this week, I'm sure that's no coincidence.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
We already have it, though it's "community broadband" set-up as a Co-Op and not directly associated with any municipality, to avoid many legal entanglements. AT&T finally got wind of what's going on (took them over 6 months) and they're freaking out.
Cap'n, what speeds does your co-op offer? I'm wondering what AT&T will have to offer to compete. If your co-op exceeds the top U-verse speeds (75 down), they'll have to offer fiber to the home to compete.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2015, 05:42 PM
 
The tiers are 1Gb, 250Mb, and 100Mb.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 01:13 PM
 

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality | WIRED
Originally, I believed that the FCC could assure internet openness through a determination of “commercial reasonableness” under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. While a recent court decision seemed to draw a roadmap for using this approach, I became concerned that this relatively new concept might, down the road, be interpreted to mean what is reasonable for commercial interests, not consumers.

That is why I am proposing that the FCC use its Title II authority to implement and enforce open internet protections.

Using this authority, I am submitting to my colleagues the strongest open internet protections ever proposed by the FCC. These enforceable, bright-line rules will ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services. I propose to fully apply—for the first time ever—those bright-line rules to mobile broadband. My proposal assures the rights of internet users to go where they want, when they want, and the rights of innovators to introduce new products without asking anyone’s permission.
Let's hope the vote isn't down party lines, snow-i.


Of course...
AT&T previews lawsuit it plans to file against FCC over net neutrality | Ars Technica
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 02:57 PM
 
This is welcome news but I'm waiting on the vote of the full FCC before getting too excited. The industry has a couple of weeks to buy off the other members.

OAW
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 03:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
This is welcome news but I'm waiting on the vote of the full FCC before getting too excited.
Without a doubt, but I was pessimistic we would get even here. I feel like proposing it was a longer shot than getting it passed.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 03:13 PM
 
You and me both. Call me "cautiously optimistic".

OAW
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 03:17 PM
 
They can sue, they kinda have to, but they won't win. It's outlined to be within the FCC's per view to make these changes, and even the most far-Right of US jurists have weighed in on this, and even given them direction on how to get there, I'm just unsure it's the best thing to do. Don't get me wrong, something has to be done, their blatantly monopolistic, anti-consumerist behavior has to be reigned in, but it feels like this is the wrong tool to do the job. We need new, contemporary legislation that is more in tune with what the internet is, like a set of precision screwdrivers, not the big, blunt 20lb sledge hammer that is Title II.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 03:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
They can sue, they kinda have to,
Yeah, I imagine it's their fiduciary duty to their shareholders. Which illustrates how ****ed up the business world is, in my view.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 03:46 PM
 
It's a lot like copyrights, the way I've heard it explained, if you don't at least go through the motions of trying to defend your position, you potentially cripple yourself later on in other associated legal matters. Also, government agencies should be challenged, in the strictest legal sense they aren't more "right" than the business, that's for the courts to decide. Especially when you're dealing with a federal "intrusion" of this magnitude.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 03:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
It's a lot like copyrights, the way I've heard it explained, if you don't at least go through the motions of trying to defend your position, you potentially cripple yourself later on in other associated legal matters.
In this case, I understand filing suit because the government waited so long to exercise its powers (Much like waiting to exercise copyright).Though obviously the counter argument being they should regulatory restraint.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 04:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
... I'm just unsure it's the best thing to do. Don't get me wrong, something has to be done, their blatantly monopolistic, anti-consumerist behavior has to be reigned in, but it feels like this is the wrong tool to do the job. We need new, contemporary legislation that is more in tune with what the internet is, like a set of precision screwdrivers, not the big, blunt 20lb sledge hammer that is Title II.
Given the size of Comcast, I think the government taking out the big hammer is the right move. I don't think there is anything better that you can realistically do. The advantage of this »blunt instrument« is that it is much harder for ISPs and carriers to circumvent the spirit of rules and regulations by fine-tuning legislation. And I think if the door to this is opened, this is what will happen, all the bite will be taken out of the laws (and the FCC). Another alternative people don't even propose is to encourage competition by breaking up Comcast. Since Comcast is moving in the opposite direction by trying to get government approval for its purchase of Time Warner Cable, I don't see that happening either.

ISPs in the US have been very bad at keeping pace with technology. Just imagine where you'd be if ISPs had made the same leaps in speed as the wireless carriers. (I know that this also comes with a price, but still.) Yet, the last thing we have heard of ISP lobbyists was the refusal to change the definition of broadband to >= 24 MBit down.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 4, 2015, 04:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Just imagine where you'd be if ISPs had made the same leaps in speed as the wireless carriers. (I know that this also comes with a price, but still.) Yet, the last thing we have heard of ISP lobbyists was the refusal to change the definition of broadband to >= 24 MBit down.
...and the claim that no one wants higher speeds.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 5, 2015, 10:56 AM
 
Don’t call them “utility” rules: The FCC’s net neutrality regime, explained | Ars Technica
One thing they were clear on: this isn’t “utility-style regulation,” because there will be no rate regulation, Internet service providers (ISPs) won’t have to file tariffs, and there’s no unbundling requirement that would force ISPs to lease network access to competitors.
Uh, I'm in favor of the bolded, the latter particularly. Rate regulation might be necessary so that companies don't gouge us under the guise "Title II hurt us this badly" and unbundling is what would help open markets to competition. Now I'm confused. What is in Title II that is going to be beneficial to the market?


ISPs will not be allowed to block or throttle Internet content, nor will they be allowed to prioritize content in exchange for payments. The rules will apply to home Internet service such as cable, DSL, and fiber, and to mobile broadband networks generally accessed with smartphones.
That's nice, but that was sort of the minimum bar before. So we're getting everything from before (plus mobile regulation), but what's really happening is Wheeler is guaranteeing he has the teeth to enforce it?
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 5, 2015, 11:15 AM
 
If Netflix won't have to pay lots of $$$ for higher/as advertised speed, WE WILL. Anything to continue to gouge the middle class.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 5, 2015, 11:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
If Netflix won't have to pay lots of $$$ for higher/as advertised speed, WE WILL. Anything to continue to gouge the middle class.
Hence the need for rate regulation.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 5, 2015, 11:27 AM
 
Under this, data caps, throttling, and packet prioritization are gone. Along with broadband being reclassified, we should see better network flow. They're essentially smashing the illusion that data is somehow a limited commodity (like electricity or gasoline).
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 5, 2015, 11:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Under this, data caps, throttling, and packet prioritization are gone.
That was the plan all along, though. While it might not have made it, that was the minimum of reform I expected.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 5, 2015, 11:38 AM
 
It's about as far as they can go without new legislation, and try getting anything like that passed with DC in its current state. Ultimately, this is a bandaid, we need a whole new set of rules for all of this but I don't see that happening for at least another 2 years.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 5, 2015, 11:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
It's about as far as they can go without new legislation
If your arguing he's playing it safe, I can agree. He's very pointedly saying he won't exercise powers he has under Title II.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 5, 2015, 02:00 PM
 
Believe it or don't
How White House Thwarted FCC Chief on Net Neutrality - WSJ
In November, the White House’s top economic adviser dropped by the Federal Communications Commission with a heads-up for the agency’s chairman, Tom Wheeler. President Barack Obama was ready to unveil his vision for regulating high-speed Internet traffic.

The specifics came four days later in an announcement that blindsided officials at the FCC. Mr. Obama said the Internet should be overseen as a public utility, with the “strongest possible rules” forcing broadband providers such as AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. to treat all Internet traffic equally.
The prod from Mr. Obama came after an unusual, secretive effort inside the White House, led by two aides who built a case for the principle known as “net neutrality” through dozens of meetings with online activists, Web startups and traditional telecommunications companies.

Acting like a parallel version of the FCC itself, R. David Edelman and Tom Power listened as Etsy Inc., Kickstarter Inc., Yahoo Inc. ’s Tumblr and other companies insisted that utility-like rules were needed to help small companies and entrepreneurs compete online, people involved in the process say.
While Mr. Obama’s position stunned officials at the FCC, he wanted to push for strong rules ensuring net neutrality right after his 2008 election over Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.). The FCC’s chairman at the time, Julius Genachowski, supported Mr. Obama and aimed to write strong rules preventing broadband providers from making some websites work faster than others for fees.

But Larry Summers, then the Obama administration’s chief economic adviser, and other officials urged the president to focus his attention on the turbulent economy, former White House officials say.
People familiar with his thinking say he didn’t want to regulate broadband companies in the same way that phone companies are regulated. Mr. Wheeler also wanted to leave some room for broadband providers to explore new business models, including accepting payments from content providers. That could allow broadband companies to offer free or cheap services.

Broadband companies generally liked the FCC chairman’s approach, but net-neutrality die-hards quickly started mobilizing against it. Last April, Marvin Ammori, a lawyer who advises startups and Web companies, warned in a meeting at Tumblr’s headquarters in the Flatiron District of New York City that Internet regulation was a do-or-die necessity for small firms.
At the same time, Mr. Ammori tried to build wider public support for net neutrality. Last May, he spoke with a researcher for “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, ” the HBO comedy series. On June 1, Mr. Oliver unleashed a 13-minute rant in an episode of the show, comparing Mr. Wheeler to a dingo and encouraging viewers to bombard the FCC with comments.

The deluge crashed the FCC’s online comment system. Overall, the agency got more than four million comments on last year’s rule proposal.

Mr. Wheeler was open-minded about the concerns of online activists and Web startups, people close to him recall, holding meetings in Silicon Valley and New York to hear objections to his plan to allow some preferential treatment for Internet traffic.

Before one meeting, Mr. Ammori advised technology executives to share personal stories of how an open Internet helped them create their companies. They were discouraged when the FCC chairman opened the meeting with a sales pitch on his approach and why it would protect net neutrality, according to people who attended the meeting.
A generational shift, including the departure of Mr. Summers, left behind a younger, tech-savvy staff inclined to favor Web companies over telecommunications firms. Senior White House officials like Jeffrey Zients, director of the National Economic Council, were primarily concerned about the potential economic impact of changing the rules.
---

My favorite part
While Obama administration officials were warming to the idea of calling for tougher rules, it took the November elections to sway Mr. Obama into action.

After Republicans gained their Senate majority, Mr. Obama took a number of actions to go around Congress, including a unilateral move to ease immigration rules. Senior aides also began looking for issues that would help define the president’s legacy. Net neutrality seemed like a good fit.
SENSE. THIS DOESNT MAKE ANY
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 02:07 PM
 
Let the derail begin
Republicans claim Obama had “improper influence” over net neutrality | Ars Technica
Second Hill Panel Probes Events Leading to FCC’s Net Neutrality Plan - Digits - WSJ

Do I find Wheeler's change of heart mildly suspicious? Yes.
Do I think the Republicans really care about the impropriety on principle? No.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 03:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
More news from bizarro land, this time involving a Republican (I'm just saying this so that people don't have any hopes of an improvement because the GOP has taken over both chambers).

...

Now Ajit Pai of the FCC (a Republican) sends a letter to Netflix CEO Hastings that his company's use of fast lanes at the expense of competitors and that Netflix's use of their own caching protocol (whose spec is public!) is further hampering the competition! Pai is accusing Netflix's policies to be hypocritical, because on the one hand they use fast lanes and on the other they publicly proclaim to support net neutrality.
Look who's back in the news: Republicans launch attack on FCC’s net neutrality plan | Ars Technica
Ajit Pai, one of two Republicans on the five-member commission, held a press conference Tuesday denouncing Wheeler, saying the plan goes further than the Democratic chairman admits. Pai referred to the proposal as “President Obama’s plan” because Wheeler decided to reclassify broadband as a common carrier service after Obama asked him to do so.
---

Although the FCC won’t decide on rates initially, home Internet customers or companies that interconnect with Internet providers would be able to complain to the FCC that rates are unreasonable.

“The plan clearly states that the FCC can regulate the rates that Internet service providers charge for broadband Internet access, for interconnection, for transit—in short, for the core aspects of Internet services,” Pai said. “To be sure, the plan says that the FCC will not engage in what it calls ex ante rate regulation. But this only means that the FCC won’t set rates ahead of time. The plan repeatedly states that the FCC will apply sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act, including their rate regulation provisions, to determine whether the prices charged by broadband providers are ‘unjust or unreasonable.’ The plan also repeatedly invites complaints about section 201 and 202 violations from end-users and edge providers alike. Thus, for the first time, the FCC would claim the power to declare broadband Internet rates and charges unreasonable after the fact. Indeed, the only limit on the FCC’s discretion to regulate rates is its own determination of whether rates are ‘just and reasonable,’ which isn’t much of a restriction at all.”
I hope that's true.


Pai said he believes in “a free and open Internet,” but said the Internet is already free and open and that net neutrality rules are thus “a solution in search of a problem.”
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 03:36 PM
 
Do you really think they will allow rates to go down?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 03:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Do you really think they will allow rates to go down?
Do you really think they'll classify them as utilities?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 04:12 PM
 
Given the spread of; Google fiber, municipality networks, community co-ops, and Elon Musk's crazy vision for cheap satellite wireless, things are going to change regardless. Never discount an eccentric multi-billionaire with a bee in his ass over something. Either the telcos/ISPs work with the change or get flattened by it, it's up to them.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 04:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Do you really think they will allow rates to go down?
The single biggest regulation which forced costs for internet access and cell phones to decrease in Europe was forcing established companies with a physical network to rent their lines to competitors at regulated rates. Prices plummeted, and competitors without a lot of »cables in the ground« (which is a hard problem, and takes a long time and a lot of money) were able to compete.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 04:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Either the telcos/ISPs work with the change or get flattened by it, it's up to them.
Are you disregarding how hard they've been fighting to stop google fiber, municipal networks, and co-ops from even getting off the ground? They're actively preventing that change from occurring.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 04:38 PM
 
They've been trying, but they've been failing miserably. Might as well try to keep the tide from rolling in.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 04:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
They've been trying, but they've been failing miserably.
Actually, they've been quite successful at two of those. Haven't heard about the fiber lawsuits.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 08:45 PM
 
There have been a few very public cases where municipal broadband has been blocked or delayed (mostly delayed), but overall they've been unsuccessful. IOW, you hear a lot more about one than you do the other.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2015, 09:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Given the spread of; Google fiber, municipality networks, community co-ops, and Elon Musk's crazy vision for cheap satellite wireless, things are going to change regardless. Never discount an eccentric multi-billionaire with a bee in his ass over something. Either the telcos/ISPs work with the change or get flattened by it, it's up to them.
Speaking of Elon

( Last edited by Chongo; Feb 10, 2015 at 10:28 PM. )
45/47
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2015, 02:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
There have been a few very public cases where municipal broadband has been blocked or delayed (mostly delayed), but overall they've been unsuccessful. IOW, you hear a lot more about one than you do the other.
The laws Shaddim. The laws.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2015, 02:13 PM
 
Plot twist!
Muni broadband providers don’t want to face common carrier rules | Ars Technica
But many smaller providers don't want stricter rules, either. Today, 43 municipal broadband providers asked the Federal Communications Commission to avoid reclassifying them as common carriers, a move that would expose them to net neutrality rules and potentially other requirements under Title II of the Communications Act.
"As smaller ISPs, we do not have an incentive to harm the openness of the Internet," they continued. "All of the undersigned face competition from one or more wireline ISPs, and we compete hard to attract and serve customers who would depart to our competitors if we engage in any business practices that interfere with their Internet experience."
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2015, 05:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
The laws Shaddim. The laws.
No idea, most states and municipalities have no laws stopping a citizen group from forming their own utility.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2015, 05:55 PM
 
Yep, would affect us too, but that's the way it goes. However, it's not nearly as bad as they're claiming, since Wheeler is adding in a whole boatload of "forbearance" into the deal and they nearly all have fewer than 100k customers.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2015, 10:55 AM
 
Full court press is on
Ajit Pai: Net neutrality will help foreign leaders control the Internet | Ars Technica
Strong net neutrality rules in the US would give authoritarian states an excuse to strengthen their grip over the Internet, Federal Communications Commission member Ajit Pai reportedly said today.

Pai is one of two Republicans on the five-member commission opposing Chairman Tom Wheeler's net neutrality plan, and spoke today at an event hosted by TechAmerica, part of the CompTIA technology trade association. According to The Hill, Pai said that tough net neutrality rules could provide cover to leaders in North Korea, Iran, and other states.
I wouldn't mind if congress dug into Pai's recent communications while they're at it.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2015, 12:20 PM
 
And they want to dick with internet content too? I knew this was just another way to stifle other political speech.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2015, 02:28 PM
 
Welcome, this episode of Fear Mongering is sponsored by, Comcast: The Company Who Cares™.








(only about its profits)
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 14, 2015, 12:28 PM
 
FYI, the major telcos and ISPs are calling in all their markers on this one. I talked with one of my legislators and it's turning into the biggest payoff/bribe fest in the history of US politics. In the last several weeks the big ISPs have been funneling $billions$ into the pockets of every dirty politician they can find (which is most of them) to kill this. It bothered the formerly mentioned legislator so much that they changed their tune and are now for reclassification due to the amount of corruption involved.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2015, 10:52 AM
 
Well, this is the biggest regulatory action since Reagan broke up the AT&T, right?

I really wish I was around to remember the wailing back then.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2015, 01:50 PM
 
I would have liked to have seen the bust-up of Standard Oil and US Steel back in the day, by all accounts that was a real bloodbath. Those guys had far more money (adjusting for inflation) and influence than today's ISPs.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2015, 03:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Well, this is the biggest regulatory action since Reagan broke up the AT&T, right?
The DOJ filed the lawsuit in 1974. Presiding judge was Harold Greene from 1978 on. Reagan became President in 1981 and the breakup order was signed in 1982. All data from wikipedia. I'm not sure Reagan had much to do with it.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2015, 03:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
The DOJ filed the lawsuit in 1974. Presiding judge was Harold Greene from 1978 on. Reagan became President in 1981 and the breakup order was signed in 1982. All data from wikipedia. I'm not sure Reagan had much to do with it.
Well, he didn't stop it (Like the W. Whitehouse giving MS a slap on the wrist).

So thanks Gerald Ford?
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2015, 10:01 AM
 
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2015, 10:26 AM
 
An article with a factually wrong statement in the title. Fantastic.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2015, 11:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
An article with a factually wrong statement in the title. Fantastic.
"FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai has emerged as a hero for those opposed to the regulation because Pai has been taking to the airwaves decrying the fact that the public is not allowed to see 332 pages of proposed internet regulation before they are potentially passed."
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2015, 11:25 AM
 
That's not what I'm referring to.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2015, 02:38 PM
 
Now I'm confused, is it available for the public to read or not?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2015, 08:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Now I'm confused, is it available for the public to read or not?
All of this is a FUD campaign designed to scare some voters into compliance.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:59 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,