End of Net Neutrality

[Making Chimichangas]

Here it comes people. I believe it is just a matter of time now.

 

Imagine that, a lawyer who once worked for Verizon now wants to do away with basically all rules on how tele-comms operate.

 

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump%E2%80%99s-fcc-quickly-targets-net-neutrality-rules/ar-AAmDRem?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartandhp

 

 

[zoogs]

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/13/naacp-trump-netneutrality/

 

Color me flabbergasted.

 

LEADING CIVIL RIGHTS groups who for many years have been heavily bankrolled by the telecom industry are signaling their support for Donald Trump’s promised rollback of the Obama administration’s net neutrality rules, which prevent internet service providers from prioritizing some content providers over others. (...)

 

It’s not the first time civil rights group have engaged in lobbying debates seemingly unrelated to their core missions, but in favor of their corporate donors. At a time when OCA received major funding from Southwest Airlines, the group filed a regulatory letter on behalf of the airline in support of Southwest’s bid to open flights at Houston airport. The NAACP, after receiving financial backing from Wal-Mart, helped the retail chain during its contentious bid to open stores in New York City.

[Making Chimichangas]

Politics makes for strange bedfellows...

[Danny Bateman]

Most all the arguments I've heard as to why ending net neutrality WOULDN'T be a bad thing for the consumer seem to hinge on "well, just wait and see, how do you know a more free market won't drive DOWN costs?" Kind of a contrarian or libertarian argument I guess.

 

Call me jaded, but I have a feeling if they go through with this, we're going to find ourselves on the wrong end of another oligopoly with increasing costs breathing down our necks. Shoot, look at how much we all pay for internet access or TV now.

 

Something tells me handing more power to the massive corporations isn't going to wind up with them patting each other on the back magnanimously while they slash costs to help out Average Joe.

[Making Chimichangas]

Most all the arguments I've heard as to why ending net neutrality WOULDN'T be a bad thing for the consumer seem to hinge on "well, just wait and see, how do you know a more free market won't drive DOWN costs?" Kind of a contrarian or libertarian argument I guess.

 

Call me jaded, but I have a feeling if they go through with this, we're going to find ourselves on the wrong end of another oligopoly with increasing costs breathing down our necks. Shoot, look at how much we all pay for internet access or TV now.

 

Something tells me handing more power to the massive corporations isn't going to wind up with them patting each other on the back magnanimously while they slash costs to help out Average Joe.

 

This is so bizarre. A free and neutral internet, you would think, would be important to almost everyone. But it seems to be one of those issues that very few people are discussing nationally.

 

And yeah, I am in 100% agreement, handing the internet over to corporations, and their rapaciously greedy CEOs and executives, is akin to making the wolf the watcher of the hen house.

 

Telecoms and other internet service providers should not be able to dictate which content is prioritized.

 

Invariably it becomes a bidding war for businesses to try and make deals with the telecoms to prioritize their services/content.

 

And those businesses will always jack up their prices to cover the outlandish costs of continually paying the telecoms whatever they want.

 

Basically, ending net neutrality gives the telecoms a license to legally engage in extortion. "Oh, you don't want to pay a 35% increase to maintain your businesses priority in web searches? We'll now give that to X Corp who will pay it and we're going to throttle the data speed of anyone who tries to access your businesses site(s)."

[VectorVictor]

Yet another reason voting Trump will bite his supporters in the ass. Sites like Huskerboard are going to be the ones hit hardest when Net Neutrality goes away. Not in a year...but over the next 3-5 years with rising costs for hosting, bandwidth (which will likely be mitigated initally by restrictions to posting certain content) and other hidden fees/taxes in order to keep things operating as they are. That's not even covering how subscribers will be soaked by their ISPs for extra fees.

 

You like to stream Netflix? Game online? Visit sites like Huskerboard? Without Net Neutrality, the ISP can slow your connection to specific sites to a crawl unless you pay them an extra fee.

 

But hey, killing Net Neutrality is looking out for all the voters, right Trump supporters?

[Making Chimichangas]

@VectorVictor, Also, I think ending net neutrality ties into Trump's desire for a state run media, propaganda machine.

 

We've already seen countless times how Trump refers to anything critical of him, or his administration, as "fake news."

 

Now, imagine no net neutrality, where only the content that praises Trump is shown. Access to anything that asks critical questions, or has dissent, is suppressed.

 

We've already seen how Mike Pence tried to install his own propaganda service while he was governor of Indiana. To think Trump and Pence won't try something similar is naivety at best.

[zoogs]

I'm the least worried about sites like Huskerboard. What I'm concerned about is sites like YouTube, Spotify, etc, getting a market stranglehold. Don't get me wrong, I love Spotify. It's a new and innovative product. As one of the Giants in the music streaming game, it will survive the end of net neutrality. More than that, it will win, and no new service will be able to jump up and compete.

 

Even now, for example, I know TMobile zeros Spotify data usage. As a TMO customer, why would I even entertain switching to a streaming service that isn't covered?

 

Net neutrality is a big deal. The internet as a whole is at stake. It should be an open, free information highway and public utility -- and not a sphere dominated by rent-seeking telecomm giants who have already won and would like to stop the game from being played.

 

MC makes great points as well. When the system comes down to deals defined by money, pressure, etc, that opens a whole new dimension for state control. Any conservative knows we cannot count on reliable state operators. Hopefully the liberals see this too.

[RedDenver]

I'm the least worried about sites like Huskerboard. What I'm concerned about is sites like YouTube, Spotify, etc, getting a market stranglehold. Don't get me wrong, I love Spotify. It's a new and innovative product. As one of the Giants in the music streaming game, it will survive the end of net neutrality. More than that, it will win, and no new service will be able to jump up and compete.

 

Even now, for example, I know TMobile zeros Spotify data usage. As a TMO customer, why would I even entertain switching to a streaming service that isn't covered?

 

Net neutrality is a big deal. The internet as a whole is at stake. It should be an open, free information highway and public utility -- and not a sphere dominated by rent-seeking telecomm giants who have already won and would like to stop the game from being played.

 

MC makes great points as well. When the system comes down to deals defined by money, pressure, etc, that opens a whole new dimension for state control. Any conservative knows we cannot count on reliable state operators. Hopefully the liberals see this too.

And with such trusted companies as Comcast and Century Link making these decisions, what could possibly go wrong?

[Making Chimichangas]

RedDenver said: And with such trusted companies as Comcast and Century Link making these decisions, what could possibly go wrong?

 

​

[zoogs]

Relatedly in internet news: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/03/senate-republicans-are-preparing-to-kill-internet-privacy

 

From health-care coverage to environmental protections, Republicans are moving quickly to erase Barack Obama’s presidential legacy. The latest Obama-era policy to be rolled back are guidelines protecting consumer Internet privacy. Last year, the Federal Communications Commission, under the direction of former Democratic chairman Tom Wheeler, mandated that broadband providers get their customers’ permission before selling or giving their data to advertisers and other third parties. On Thursday, the Senate voted along party lines, 50-48, to scrap those privacy rules, making it easier for broadband providers to share browsing history information about their customers.

FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOM! Power to the People!

[commando]

Relatedly in internet news: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/03/senate-republicans-are-preparing-to-kill-internet-privacy

 

From health-care coverage to environmental protections, Republicans are moving quickly to erase Barack Obama’s presidential legacy. The latest Obama-era policy to be rolled back are guidelines protecting consumer Internet privacy. Last year, the Federal Communications Commission, under the direction of former Democratic chairman Tom Wheeler, mandated that broadband providers get their customers’ permission before selling or giving their data to advertisers and other third parties. On Thursday, the Senate voted along party lines, 50-48, to scrap those privacy rules, making it easier for broadband providers to share browsing history information about their customers.

FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOM! Power to the People!

 

i wonder if that would make it easier for the government to monitor the people?

[Making Chimichangas]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/net-neutrality-is-trump%E2%80%99s-next-target-administration-says/ar-BBz54Yd?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartandhp

 

[Making Chimichangas]

Wake up people. This end of net neutrality affects you far more than you realize.

[Michiganball]

Yea destruction of Net Neutrality is going to hit our pocketbooks no doubt, comcast and it's like are drooling right now, but where is the "Ma Freedumb!" conservative brigade as our internet privacy is about to get obliterated.....by conservatives.