User Controls
FCC to Repeal Net Neutrality
-
2017-04-27 at 5:41 AM UTChttps://www.rt.com/usa/386275-net-neutrality-fcc-repeal/
Goddamnit. Especially worrying given the recent expansion of censorship under the guise of 'fighting fake news'. -
2017-04-27 at 5:42 AM UTCNet neutrality is communism. I'm a red blooded American, we don't like pinkos.
-
2017-04-27 at 5:43 AM UTCWhile they're at it, they should ban encryption so the terrorists can't communicate securely, and ban guns so criminals cannot do illegal things with them.
-
2017-04-27 at 5:44 AM UTCThey should also mandate that all buildings must be built upside down underground so that 9/11 can never happen again
-
2017-04-27 at 5:49 AM UTCSeriously though, I know net neutrality is in principle a good thing and shit but like my TMobile connection violates net neutrality to let me have no metering on video streaming, Spotify etc... That wouldn't be possible with net neutrality. So I'm for the principle, but in practice I can see why it can be viewed as an unreasonable restriction that harms customers and companies alike.
Of course the reason why I think it is good in principle is that phone companies are dicks and won't always do good things. But surely there has to be some sort of compromise position where net neutrality is default, but the service provider can add value if the customer is willing. -
2017-04-27 at 5:52 AM UTCOf course the problem with that idea is probably that ISPs will "anti-discount" their way into making high cost," net neutral" packages. Like "your standard package is $350 and has a cap! Or you could take our special premium Deep Packet Inspection package for $80 with unlimited video streaming and higher speeds!"The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-04-27 at 5:52 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Seriously though, I know net neutrality is in principle a good thing and shit but like my TMobile connection violates net neutrality to let me have no metering on video streaming, Spotify etc… That wouldn't be possible with net neutrality. So I'm for the principle, but in practice I can see why it can be viewed as an unreasonable restriction that harms customers and companies alike.
Of course the reason why I think it is good in principle is that companies are dicks and won't always do good things
I think that might be valid because it treats the streaming service separately from your internet service; they can offer a dedicated streaming service as long as it doesn't impact on the core product. The major issue I have with the repeal is that it would allow ISPs to essentially nullroute sites or even just specific URLs out of existence -
2017-04-27 at 6:02 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra I think that might be valid because it treats the streaming service separately from your internet service; they can offer a dedicated streaming service as long as it doesn't impact on the core product. The major issue I have with the repeal is that it would allow ISPs to essentially nullroute sites or even just specific URLs out of existence
I don't see how you can justify treating an internet based service at all like it's a different service. They just don't meter the usage to those services. Allowing that as a loophole will definitely allow preferential treatments (for example, the "fast lanes" that were proposed). I don't see any way to allow for that without violating net neutrality, unless they use a special protocol or something to separate it from "normal" internet service.
So for example Bastardcast might make their standard days package like 5 Mbps, which makes Netflix, Hulu etc totally unwatchable (but non-video content is perfectly usable even a 5Mbps connection) and cap it at 10GB so torrent info and streaming become a non-option, then launch Comcast UWatch, which has a fast lane and doesn't have any caps. -
2017-04-27 at 6:09 AM UTCMaybe, I have no idea how the actual law around it works, but I wouldn't think they were just flagrantly contravening that directive.
I was actually just thinking about who this affects - would it just be ISPs, or would it also affect the behaviour of companies that own core internet infrastructure, like Google? Disallowing sites from the caching and delivery datacentres they run would force traffic down other routes, likely causing timeouts and other congestion-related issues. -
2017-04-27 at 7:13 AM UTCThis site, along with most of what's still interesting on the net, is almost certainly going to end up anal-rape-tracked if the repeal goes through.
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Net neutrality is communism.
Which is why it's a good thing.
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Seriously though, I know net neutrality is in principle a good thing and shit but like my TMobile connection violates net neutrality to let me have no metering on video streaming, Spotify etc… That wouldn't be possible with net neutrality. So I'm for the principle, but in practice I can see why it can be viewed as an unreasonable restriction that harms customers and companies alike.
Line metering isn't a violation of net neutrality, and it's reasonable on congested radio networks (although congestion is a product of fucking people for profit, but that's a bigger issue). It's content-specific metering that's the issue. If you're contributing to undue network congestion I don't care if it's from videos or goat porn, or baby picture on facebook and conversely if you're not consuming resources in a pathological way there is no reason ISPs should give a shit what you're doing. Net neutrality has always been a censorship issue, "better service" is the biggest most transparent pile of bullshit the american telecom industry has ever come up with, and that's really saying something since these are companies that are enron-tier corrupt. -
2017-04-27 at 7:27 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny This site, along with most of what's still interesting on the net, is almost certainly going to end up anal-rape-tracked if the repeal goes through.
Which is why it's a good thing.
Line metering isn't a violation of net neutrality, and it's reasonable on congested radio networks (although congestion is a product of fucking people for profit, but that's a bigger issue). It's content-specific metering that's the issue. If you're contributing to undue network congestion I don't care if it's from videos or goat porn, or baby picture on facebook and conversely if you're not consuming resources in a pathological way there is no reason ISPs should give a shit what you're doing. Net neutrality has always been a censorship issue, "better service" is the biggest most transparent pile of bullshit the american telecom industry has ever come up with, and that's really saying something since these are companies that are enron-tier corrupt.
Is allowing me unlimited Spotify, video streaming etc not content-specific? Or do you just mean like "okay we won't allow anti-hillary YouTube videos"? Because I don't mind then violating NN if they just unmeter some services to add value. -
2017-04-27 at 7:31 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Is allowing me unlimited Spotify, video streaming etc not content-specific? Or do you just mean like "okay we won't allow anti-hillary YouTube videos"? Because I don't mind then violating NN if they just unmeter some services to add value.
It is content specific, but unmetering those services doesn't "add value". It causes the same degree of network congestion if you're pulling X Mbps from spottify as X Mbps from niggasin.space or torrent trackers, or goatpornhub. Unmetering those services implicitly raallocates bandwidth from every other metered service, so essentially it's a grant of limited monopoly on bandwidth to some services but not others. -
2017-04-27 at 7:52 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny It is content specific, but unmetering those services doesn't "add value". It causes the same degree of network congestion if you're pulling X Mbps from spottify as X Mbps from niggasin.space or torrent trackers, or goatpornhub. Unmetering those services implicitly raallocates bandwidth from every other metered service, so essentially it's a grant of limited monopoly on bandwidth to some services but not others.
I mean that it adds value to me, the consumer. If I had to pick 10 GB per month or 5 GB + TMobile gets to collect data about my viewing habits to sell to advertisers and allows me to stream unlimited music and video... Why is that such a bad thing? -
2017-04-27 at 8:09 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon I mean that it adds value to me, the consumer.
It adds value to you as a user of <fasttracked service>, but at the expense of everyone who doesn't use <fasttracked service>. It also serves to entrench fastracked services: competitors are playing on an uneven field so someone like spotify, who currently has market dominance, can degrade their quality of service and you'll be forced to choose between using another service that has disadvantaged access to the network or the degrading incumbent. And of course the greater fear most people who support net neutrality have is that this network priority won't simply be given on a monetary basis (although that's frightening on its own) but that providers of objectionable or unpopular content will find themselves cut of or with severely limited access to the network with no means of recourse. It essentially grants unrestricted right of ISPs to censor content. While currently things like DNS seizures require a court order, in the absence of NN laws law enforcement can simply pressure ISPs into denying access to a given host, or ISPs can do it of their own accord for their own monetary gain. -
2017-04-27 at 8:22 AM UTCHere's a great idea: they can just leave the Internet the fuck alone and fuck off.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-04-27 at 8:59 AM UTCThis has been in the works for a while. This is also why it's good to have alternatives like TOR, i2P and FreeNet. With regards to ISPs null routing certain websites. We should make a move towards block-chain hosting/domain resolution.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-04-27 at 9:09 AM UTCIf they start playing games with the DNS routing, I can guarantee you they will get fucked right up the ass six ways to Sunday.
-
2017-04-27 at 9:57 AM UTCDoesn't matter, we're all dead in a month tops
-
2017-04-27 at 10:02 AM UTC
-
2017-04-27 at 10:32 AM UTC
