FCC to repeal Net Neutrality Bill

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

gizmodo




Couldn't find a secondary source.

What evidence does gizmondo have? I didn’t see anything sourced for the claims about Cruz.

How about this?

[Katganistan]

Call or write your Congress Critters and tell them to support net neutrality or lose your vote.

Then if they don't support it, vote for the other guy.

[Herador]

So where is the STATES RIGHTS crowd during this open federal override?

The FCC shut them up with a tandem proposal that blocks states from passing their own net-neutrality bills.

Really though, this was always going to happen, after it was beaten and then proposed a second time I knew they weren't going to give up. The internet at large is just too juicy and ripe for exploiting, basically any amount of money Telecoms could spend would be dwarfed by the amount they stand to make over time.

Shadowrun is turning into reality and I want out.

[Topoliani]

You know, maybe we should let this happen before grabbing our torches.

If it ends up being a good thing or nothing changes, (possible), then it's a good thing we didn't go out into the street and waste our time.

If it ends up being a bad thing, (also possible), then let's grab our picket fences because as a DEMOCRACY we can still do something about it.

That's just my two cents after thinking about it for a bit and reading arguments on both sides of the case.

[Greed and Death]

I still don't quite understand what's going on here...

Net Neutrality was a rule adopted by the FCC in 2014 that requires ISPs to treat all data equally.

First we will talk about home ISPs.
Prior to this there was some throttling of individuals using bit torrents and p2p services to download massive amounts of files. These people typically represent 5% of internet users but use maybe 60-70% of the resources. I generally liked this as it keeps prices low for me.

There was also talk of a tiered internet system like Grandma could get an email only system for cheap, and Dad could get email, news, and porn for a middle price, and juniors gaming and file downloading would pay more. The problem was this was very unpopular, the cost differences were small, and it was very easy to subvert by making your gaming look like a news stream. So this never happened.

Now for Cellphones there has actually been throttling. This is because cellphone bandwidth is expensive. In the single digit years they tended to throttle Voice over IP, previously most carriers throttled video streaming either in total or after a limit was reached currently some of the lower tiered carriers (metro PCS) would like to throttle video streaming. If you look to portugal there are some budget providers that do in fact provide tiered service this is doable as some carriers will require that you use their phone and it is easy for them to have a degree of control over what is on the phone.

[Shofercia]

This will go down in History as one of the dumbest moves, if they actually try it. Needless to say, I support Net Neutrality.

It's a high note of stupidity but Trump still has time to do something even dumber in the future.

Thanks for cheering me up!

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/21/fcc-net-neutrality-blocking-states-183468

The Obama administration’s net neutrality rules met their all-but-certain demise Tuesday as Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai outlined a plan to repeal them — while making sure states can't impose their own regulations to fill the void.

So one of the few areas where Cali's local reps are actually knowledgeable, gets preempted by Congress, who seem to be rather clueless about the entire situation.

So where is the STATES RIGHTS crowd during this open federal override?

Things like this, Vass, are exactly why we need more States Rights. And I totally support States Rights on this issue.

Call or write your Congress Critters and tell them to support net neutrality or lose your vote.

Then if they don't support it, vote for the other guy.

"Dear Congressperson, you can take my house, you can take my healthcare, but you cannot take my porn!"

You know, maybe we should let this happen before grabbing our torches.

If it ends up being a good thing or nothing changes, (possible), then it's a good thing we didn't go out into the street and waste our time.

If it ends up being a bad thing, (also possible), then let's grab our picket fences because as a DEMOCRACY we can still do something about it.

That's just my two cents after thinking about it for a bit and reading arguments on both sides of the case.

It will end up being a bad thing. Why is this even a question? When you have a functioning hen house where hens are laying lots of eggs, do you hand over the keys to the fox just to see what happens?

[Topoliani]

It will end up being a bad thing. Why is this even a question? When you have a functioning hen house where hens are laying lots of eggs, do you hand over the keys to the fox just to see what happens?

Eh, fair enough.

[Greed and Death]

So where is the STATES RIGHTS crowd during this open federal override?

The repeal of a federal rule is a federal override now ?

[Torisakia]

I already pay my ISP $200 a month for slow speeds and blocked apps, even with the nets being neutral. So either way this fucks me over. I would call my representative/senator/local Billy Mays or whatever, but I live in the same state as Roy Moore and apparently that would causes trouble between me and the general public if that gets out. So what do I do now? I want to continue paying my $200/month for 0.04Mbps download and broken sites instead of $19.95/month for (objectively) a faster speed and a few sites that actually work.

[Ethel mermania]

I still don't quite understand what's going on here...

Net Neutrality was a rule adopted by the FCC in 2014 that requires ISPs to treat all data equally.

First we will talk about home ISPs.
Prior to this there was some throttling of individuals using bit torrents and p2p services to download massive amounts of files. These people typically represent 5% of internet users but use maybe 60-70% of the resources. I generally liked this as it keeps prices low for me.

There was also talk of a tiered internet system like Grandma could get an email only system for cheap, and Dad could get email, news, and porn for a middle price, and juniors gaming and file downloading would pay more. The problem was this was very unpopular, the cost differences were small, and it was very easy to subvert by making your gaming look like a news stream. So this never happened.

Now for Cellphones there has actually been throttling. This is because cellphone bandwidth is expensive. In the single digit years they tended to throttle Voice over IP, previously most carriers throttled video streaming either in total or after a limit was reached currently some of the lower tiered carriers (metro PCS) would like to throttle video streaming. If you look to portugal there are some budget providers that do in fact provide tiered service this is doable as some carriers will require that you use their phone and it is easy for them to have a degree of control over what is on the phone.

Well done.

Feeling ok?

[New haven america]

So where is the STATES RIGHTS crowd during this open federal override?

IOKIYAR

[The of Japan]

Call or write your Congress Critters and tell them to support net neutrality or lose your vote.

Then if they don't support it, vote for the other guy.

This is not a bill, this is a regulation change

[Greed and Death]

Call or write your Congress Critters and tell them to support net neutrality or lose your vote.

Then if they don't support it, vote for the other guy.

This is not a bill, this is a regulation change

Congress can overwrite a regulation change with the passage of a statute. By the earliest possible would be 2021 assuming Trump loses reelection and the Democrats sweep the house and Senate.

[Outer Sparta]

Every time there is a regime change in Washington, the FCC rules get changed. Under Obama- it was pro-net neutrality while under Trump- they're attempting to reverse course to be anti-net neutrality. It is ridiculous.

Given how the FCC regulates radio bands to prevent signal conflicts, I propose that it be isolated from the executive branch like the Federal Reserve is. It isn't right that the FCC gets influenced by any presidential administration that comes in. The FCC must be free to operate independently and only have policy guided by what is best for telecommunications overall. The Presidency doesn't have the power to interfere with interest rates or monetary policy, this shouldn't be the case with the EPA or FCC either.

The FCC already has too much power to begin with, considering their punitive restrictions on expression in visual media.

The FCC isn't doing their job. Regulatory agencies should do their jobs, but when you have people like Ajit Pai in charge, then corporate interests have a way in.

[Independant Nations and Guilds]

The FCC isn't doing their job. Regulatory agencies should do their jobs, but when you have people like Ajit Pai in charge, then corporate interests have a way in.

Agreed. Such agencies should be doing their damn jobs instead of letting whoever comes into power pull them around like a chew toy. The biggest irony is that the first time this became an issue that I can remember, the FCC was the one protecting Net Neutrality. Now they're trying to tear it down. How disgusting it is that a regime change like this can make this agency do a 180.

[Outer Sparta]

The FCC isn't doing their job. Regulatory agencies should do their jobs, but when you have people like Ajit Pai in charge, then corporate interests have a way in.

Agreed. Such agencies should be doing their damn jobs instead of letting whoever comes into power pull them around like a chew toy. The biggest irony is that the first time this became an issue that I can remember, the FCC was the one protecting Net Neutrality. Now they're trying to tear it down. How disgusting it is that a regime change like this can make this agency do a 180.

That's the one thing that annoys me about regulatory agencies. If we need extreme vetting, we need to put it in place of the people leading these agencies.

[Iebrelara]

But what'll be slowed? Will they implement a judgement system on prioritization? Will the government be able to attack sites it doesn't like and slow them down? I have so many questions yet nowhere to get answers...

[Outer Sparta]

But what'll be slowed? Will they implement a judgement system on prioritization? Will the government be able to attack sites it doesn't like and slow them down? I have so many questions yet nowhere to get answers...

Well the government could attack left-leaning media like CNN or NBC and prioritize something like Fox News.

[Bakery Hill]

As I put a little more bluntly on another thread, net neutrality is the type of political issue that should only concern the otaku types. Hopefully this will encourage people to get off the internet and explore the real world. We have far too much focus on internet problems to the detriment of real world issues. Hopefully this is part of a broader movement that encourages us to log off and properly engage.

[Atlatikahesin]

Egads, this'll slow down the anime streams. That cannot be allowed.

Seeing meguca is buffering.

this is the worst pun i have seen all day. good job, friend

[New haven america]

But what'll be slowed?

Depends on what ISP's and the government want to slow down or block.

[Outer Sparta]

As I put a little more bluntly on another thread, net neutrality is the type of political issue that should only concern the otaku types. Hopefully this will encourage people to get off the internet and explore the real world. We have far too much focus on internet problems to the detriment of real world issues. Hopefully this is part of a broader movement that encourages us to log off and properly engage.

However, the world is increasingly becoming more technologically advanced, and nothing can stop this trend. Internet issues are for everyone since we all use it in some way, shape, or form.

[Greed and Death]

But what'll be slowed? Will they implement a judgement system on prioritization? Will the government be able to attack sites it doesn't like and slow them down? I have so many questions yet nowhere to get answers...

Print websites no. Home internet you might notice something for file sharing services like bit torrents and p2p but the networks today are too fast to make paying for a fast lane worth it.

Now cellphone networks yes there is still an incentive to pay for a fast lane in streaming video service.

[Independant Nations and Guilds]

That's the one thing that annoys me about regulatory agencies. If we need extreme vetting, we need to put it in place of the people leading these agencies.

That brings up a point about this that I think is even crazier. Ajit Pai claims this is about having "less government regulation" and allowing for "more innovation"...

The first part of that argument falls flat: It is the FCC's damn JOB to regulate communications. This would be comparable to the POTUS waking up one day and saying "Nah, I don't want to do presidential things today. Let the Senate handle that."

The second part also makes no sense: ISP's aren't paid to "innovate", they're paid to provide a service, and they're not even good at doing that much. The real innovators are the people ON the internet, not the people PROVIDING the internet.

[Outer Sparta]

That's the one thing that annoys me about regulatory agencies. If we need extreme vetting, we need to put it in place of the people leading these agencies.

That brings up a point about this that I think is even crazier. Ajit Pai claims this is about having "less government regulation" and allowing for "more innovation"...

The first part of that argument falls flat: It is the FCC's damn JOB to regulate communications. This would be comparable to the POTUS waking up one day and saying "Nah, I don't want to do presidential things today. Let the Senate handle that."

The second part also makes no sense: ISP's aren't paid to "innovate", they're paid to provide a service, and they're not even good at doing that much. The real innovators are the people ON the internet, not the people PROVIDING the internet.

Less government regulation? That will lead to a more unfree internet. More innovation? There would be less innovation if some parts of the internet are faster than other parts. Ajit Pai doesn't know what he is saying.