FCC to repeal Net Neutrality Bill

[Salandriagado]

That sounds like a claim that you can source.

sure thing

So it basically didn't change at all, is still in line with historical patterns, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is anything to do with net neutrality, got it.

[Salandriagado]

What is the argument for NN? On the individual level, it's to increase your broadband speeds as the expectation is that it will become slower without it. The imposition of Title II NN has led to a decline in investment for broadband infrastructure, decreasing the physical available bandwidth available, and therefore whatever share you get.

That isn't the argument at all, and the fact that you claim that it is only goes to show that you haven't even been reading those arguments.

[Polinstine]

To get them to fight against Trump's attempt to take their fast internet you would first have to spread this news so they would know what is going on.

Oh they know, or at least I'd bet they will. This would ping their radar quicker than you can say 'Pepe'.

If not, someone needs to go yell at 4chan and the like about it.

4Chan previous statements last time someone did that is "how do we even know that the ISP wont turn into a monopoly anyway. net neutrality will make it harder to shut them down." Anon.

[Vassenor]

Looking in-depth at the faked pro-repeal comments sent to the FCC.

In short, the majority of the pro-repeal comments (over 1.3 million) were almost certainly written using mail merge and possibly some manner of spam-writing algorithm. Less than 5% of the comments submitted were unique, and 99% of those were in favour of the retention of the current NN regulations.

[Zohiania]

When people are complaining about net neutrality being repealed and not the internet being in the control of the the international community, you know like authoritarian regimes which threaten freedom of speech and would lead to censorship of the internet. One of the main reasons the U.S. has argued to keep the Internet out of the hands of the United Nations's International Telecommunications Unit (ITU) is that the Internet does not classify as a "telecommunication service" and is therefore not in the ITU's purview. However, these net neutrality regulations specifically designate the Internet as a telecommunication service, hamstringing the country in arguing for the Internet to remain out of the ITU's control.

If you're going to lie, at least make an effort to make it not entirely obvious.

How is what I said a lie?

[Vassenor]

If you're going to lie, at least make an effort to make it not entirely obvious.

How is what I said a lie?

Perhaps you should provide evidence in support of your claims.

[Ethel mermania]

comcast's stance on net neutrality.

http://www.lightreading.com/net-neutral ... er_lrdaily

a good point the article makes against net neutrality (full disclosure I have been saying for years that net neutrality does not exist today )

"...Currently, the Open Internet Order negotiates that issue by defining some Internet services as Broadband Internet Access Services (BIAS services) and some as non-BIAS services. Non-BIAS services include things like dedicated business network access and also managed applications like voice-over-IP and managed IP streaming video delivery -- i.e. services that are provisioned separately from standard, mass-market consumer Internet access. However, the FCC hasn't delineated every service that might need or want separately-provisioned network support as non-BIAS. Not to mention, there are plenty of applications that don't exist yet today that might fall into this category. (Think future health services, real-time vehicle management, etc.) "

[Salandriagado]

comcast's stance on net neutrality.

http://www.lightreading.com/net-neutral ... er_lrdaily

a good point the article makes against net neutrality (full disclosure I have been saying for years that net neutrality does not exist today )

"...Currently, the Open Internet Order negotiates that issue by defining some Internet services as Broadband Internet Access Services (BIAS services) and some as non-BIAS services. Non-BIAS services include things like dedicated business network access and also managed applications like voice-over-IP and managed IP streaming video delivery -- i.e. services that are provisioned separately from standard, mass-market consumer Internet access. However, the FCC hasn't delineated every service that might need or want separately-provisioned network support as non-BIAS. Not to mention, there are plenty of applications that don't exist yet today that might fall into this category. (Think future health services, real-time vehicle management, etc.) "

Relevant.

[Paxiosolange]

Good thing I live in Canada. The CRTC just adores net neutrality.

[Outer Sparta]

Good thing I live in Canada. The CRTC just adores net neutrality.

At least they don't have an Ajit Pai of their own.

[Hurdergaryp]

comcast's stance on net neutrality.

http://www.lightreading.com/net-neutral ... er_lrdaily

a good point the article makes against net neutrality (full disclosure I have been saying for years that net neutrality does not exist today )

"...Currently, the Open Internet Order negotiates that issue by defining some Internet services as Broadband Internet Access Services (BIAS services) and some as non-BIAS services. Non-BIAS services include things like dedicated business network access and also managed applications like voice-over-IP and managed IP streaming video delivery -- i.e. services that are provisioned separately from standard, mass-market consumer Internet access. However, the FCC hasn't delineated every service that might need or want separately-provisioned network support as non-BIAS. Not to mention, there are plenty of applications that don't exist yet today that might fall into this category. (Think future health services, real-time vehicle management, etc.) "

That would be the same Comcast who, together with its fellow telecommunication juggernauts, used identity theft and automatically generated anti-Net Neutrality in order to pretend they actually had the support of real, existing people? There's no doubt that the corporate propaganda you're referring to is excellently written, but that doesn't mean that the bastards who paid the person who wrote that piece aren't utter and complete bastards.

[Ethel mermania]

comcast's stance on net neutrality.

http://www.lightreading.com/net-neutral ... er_lrdaily

a good point the article makes against net neutrality (full disclosure I have been saying for years that net neutrality does not exist today )

"...Currently, the Open Internet Order negotiates that issue by defining some Internet services as Broadband Internet Access Services (BIAS services) and some as non-BIAS services. Non-BIAS services include things like dedicated business network access and also managed applications like voice-over-IP and managed IP streaming video delivery -- i.e. services that are provisioned separately from standard, mass-market consumer Internet access. However, the FCC hasn't delineated every service that might need or want separately-provisioned network support as non-BIAS. Not to mention, there are plenty of applications that don't exist yet today that might fall into this category. (Think future health services, real-time vehicle management, etc.) "

That would be the same Comcast who, together with its fellow telecommunication juggernauts, used identity theft and automatically generated anti-Net Neutrality in order to pretend they actually had the support of real, existing people? There's no doubt that the corporate propaganda you're referring to is excellently written, but that doesn't mean that the bastards who paid the person who wrote that piece aren't utter and complete bastards.

Light reading is an industry trade rag. So yes they are biased.

That doesn't mean their basic points are wrong.

There is not net neutrality now, and there are services that might require priortization in the future, as there are prioritized services in place now.

[Senkaku]

Has anyone told the OP it's "neutrality" not "neutrally" btw

[Len Hyet]

Has anyone told the OP it's "neutrality" not "neutrally" btw

Has anyone told him it's not a bill?

[Herador]

Has anyone told the OP it's "neutrality" not "neutrally" btw

Has anyone told him it's not a bill?

It's not even sitting on the steps of capital hill!

[Senkaku]

Has anyone told him it's not a bill?

It's not even sitting on the steps of capital hill!

what about capitol hill

[Len Hyet]

It's not even sitting on the steps of capital hill!

what about capitol hill

Schoolhouse Rock I'm Just a Bill on Capitol Hill

[Senkaku]

what about capitol hill

Schoolhouse Rock I'm Just a Bill on Capitol Hill

I know, I was making fun of the typo

[Len Hyet]

Schoolhouse Rock I'm Just a Bill on Capitol Hill

I know, I was making fun of the typo

Oh man I totally missed that

[Herador]

I know, I was making fun of the typo

Oh man I totally missed that

So did I. The second you give my a touch screen keyboard my typing goes to a second grade level.

[Saiwania]

Lets assume that Net Neutrality is gone, that it gets undone under Trump. I don't think all hope is lost, the silver lining is that there appears to be some recourse that can be taken even then. If ISPs are like a private business instead of a "title 2 common carrier" then they can be subject to FTC regulations instead.

If major ISPs partake in provably anti-competitive practices such as cutting off access to their business rivals, then they technically could be running afoul of the law in the US. All it'd take is a different administration to turn the tables on them. The telecom industry thinks that getting rid of net neutrality is a winning move for them, but it is really a "be careful what you wish for" scenario.

[Des-Bal]

Some guy most people didn't vote for, appointed some guy nobody ever voted for, to do something that most people are against. What exactly has to happen before we as a society call bullshit?

[Vassenor]

Some guy most people didn't vote for, appointed some guy nobody ever voted for, to do something that most people are against. What exactly has to happen before we as a society call bullshit?

Doing stuff in a government position to benefit his former employers.

[Camicon]

Some guy most people didn't vote for, appointed some guy nobody ever voted for, to do something that most people are against. What exactly has to happen before we as a society call bullshit?

Doing stuff in a government position to benefit his former employers.

Former and future employers.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/we-people-call-resignation-fcc-chairman-ajit-varadaraj-pai

I don’t think Trump’s administration has responded to any of the petitions that have reached their 100,000 goal on whitehouse.gov since Trump took office, so any petition regarding this would most likely be just as ignored, sadly.