That's the problem. People are unaware of the situation and how serious it is.
Advertisement
by Honeydewistania » Wed Nov 22, 2017 7:53 am
Alger wrote:if you have egoquotes in your signature, touch grass
by Naval Monte » Wed Nov 22, 2017 7:56 am
by Thermodolia » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:00 am
by Thermodolia » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:01 am
Entronium wrote:If this repeal passes meny sites will shut down
And some of those sites banned advertisements and rely on donations solely.
by Galloism » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:05 am
by Vivida Vis Animi » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:05 am
The FCC is quietly about to announce a major change right before Thanksgiving
by Ethel mermania » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:06 am
by The Land of Home » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:06 am
by Thermodolia » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:08 am
by Ethel mermania » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:10 am
The Land of Home wrote:Thermodolia wrote:It's not a repeal because there is nothing to repeal, it's a rule change. Nothing is going to happen to 90% of the Internet
"Nothing's going to happen" you say.... You poor deluded fool. Without governmental protection we'll be at the mercy of corporations, corporations who are not only not obligated in any way to listen or to respect its consumers, but actively profits from exploiting them. Net Neutrality's essentially the helmet you wear when riding a motor bike. Maybe you'll never crash and you'll be fine, but who are we kidding here. You are likely to crash, and without the helmet your brain is spreading over the pavement.
by Ifreann » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:16 am
The Land of Home wrote:Thermodolia wrote:It's not a repeal because there is nothing to repeal, it's a rule change. Nothing is going to happen to 90% of the Internet
"Nothing's going to happen" you say.... You poor deluded fool. Without governmental protection we'll be at the mercy of corporations, corporations who are not only not obligated in any way to listen or to respect its consumers, but actively profits from exploiting them. Net Neutrality's essentially the helmet you wear when riding a motor bike. Maybe you'll never crash and you'll be fine, but who are we kidding here. You are likely to crash, and without the helmet your brain is spreading over the pavement.
by Minoa » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:25 am
by Ethel mermania » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:29 am
Minoa wrote:For those living in countries where you can easily switch providers and providers have to actually compete for your wallet, like the UK (the country where a department store chain provides broadband), Netherlands, Switzerland or Japan: it should be noted that the issue of Net Neutrality appears understandably a lot more serious within the US, because in many places there is no choice of a service provider.
There are many places in the US where it is either one big service provider, or nothing at all: with that kind of monopoly, any service provider can easily throttle Internet access like AOL’s walled garden and the customers have to live with that.
That is why many internet freedom advocates have to depend on the likes of the FCC to force the providers to care about their customers.
by Petrolheadia » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:29 am
by Petrolheadia » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:30 am
by Galloism » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:31 am
Ethel mermania wrote:Minoa wrote:For those living in countries where you can easily switch providers and providers have to actually compete for your wallet, like the UK (the country where a department store chain provides broadband), Netherlands, Switzerland or Japan: it should be noted that the issue of Net Neutrality appears understandably a lot more serious within the US, because in many places there is no choice of a service provider.
There are many places in the US where it is either one big service provider, or nothing at all: with that kind of monopoly, any service provider can easily throttle Internet access like AOL’s walled garden and the customers have to live with that.
That is why many internet freedom advocates have to depend on the likes of the FCC to force the providers to care about their customers.
The vast majority of Americans have the option of at least 2 providers to the home. (The cable company and the telco). Now I have nothing nice to say about either charter or at&t). But there 8s a choice. Tbh, I would rather the fcc and doj focus on increasing competition in the local markets. (But tbf, that ain't going to happen either).
by Ethel mermania » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:32 am
by Minoa » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:36 am
Galloism wrote:Ethel mermania wrote:
The vast majority of Americans have the option of at least 2 providers to the home. (The cable company and the telco). Now I have nothing nice to say about either charter or at&t). But there 8s a choice. Tbh, I would rather the fcc and doj focus on increasing competition in the local markets. (But tbf, that ain't going to happen either).
Yeah, duopolies though are not significant improvements over monopolies. They typically adopt the same shitty policies as each other, so there's no meaningful choice.
Increasing competition sounds good, but given the infrastructure requirements (and the limits of physics when it comes to wireless), that's hard.
by Ifreann » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:38 am
Petrolheadia wrote:You know it's a bill is really bad when even its defenders can only say "well, it''s not that bad".
by Ethel mermania » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:42 am
Galloism wrote:Ethel mermania wrote:
The vast majority of Americans have the option of at least 2 providers to the home. (The cable company and the telco). Now I have nothing nice to say about either charter or at&t). But there 8s a choice. Tbh, I would rather the fcc and doj focus on increasing competition in the local markets. (But tbf, that ain't going to happen either).
Yeah, duopolies though are not significant improvements over monopolies. They typically adopt the same shitty policies as each other, so there's no meaningful choice.
Increasing competition sounds good, but given the infrastructure requirements (and the limits of physics when it comes to wireless), that's hard.
by Ethel mermania » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:44 am
Minoa wrote:Galloism wrote:Yeah, duopolies though are not significant improvements over monopolies. They typically adopt the same shitty policies as each other, so there's no meaningful choice.
Increasing competition sounds good, but given the infrastructure requirements (and the limits of physics when it comes to wireless), that's hard.
This, but also the state of the competition (or lack of thereof) in the US makes one feel that there is only one choice in the country, and with the internet becoming more prolific, it sometimes feels that it is “(big service provider) or else!”.
by Naval Monte » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:17 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bears Armed, Bienenhalde, Plan Neonie, Soviet Haaregrad, Talibanada
Advertisement