Author Topic: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules  (Read 930 times)

Offline Hoofer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4759
  • Gender: Male
  • HAM Radio - the last form of free expression
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #15 on: December 15, 2017, 07:03:08 AM »
A must watch... the clueless MSNBC host had NO idea about the antitrust regs that would prevent FB, NetFlix, or anyone from paying for special treatment...  then he tries to backtrack and pretends he knows about the laws, then tries to cling to his argument that gets slapped down by the FTC law....

http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/14/msnbc-anchor-loses-net-neutrality-debate-with-former-fcc-chairman-video/

Here's what Net Neutering really did.

Quote
“What Title II [net neutrality] has done, in the wireless space anyway, is reduce investment in the past two years by 18 percent,” he continued. “We need about $300 billion over the next decade to build out [5G] networks and every independent Wall Street analyst I’ve spoken with says…the 1,000 requirements of Title II has created tremendous uncertainty.”

Stopped investment in newer technology.   Why would I want to build a network with my stockholder's money for -you- to use and restrict  or throttle my customers?   The "Net result" was bandwidth kept filling up with traffic, and little is/was being done to expand network bandwidth.  On the other hand, point-to-point bandwidth of private networks will *always* be there, completely out of the reach of the public.

Net Neutering is about as popular as PBS, NPR and government "protected & funded" radio.... full of content a very small segment pays attention to, but pays through the nose to support.   

The difference between the "public air waves" and "the Internet" ought to be OBVIOUS, but I never hear it mentioned.
Nobody had to pay to build the "public air waves" as a transmission medium.

Keep in mind, the backbone of the 4LTE, 5G or whatever is still Fiber Optic carrier.  Someone has to pay to build & maintain that.
All animals are created equal; Some just take longer to cook.   Survival is keeping an eye on those around you...

Offline Hoofer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4759
  • Gender: Male
  • HAM Radio - the last form of free expression
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2017, 07:12:29 AM »
The left is going nuts because the government just lost control of internet control. Net neutrality was just step one of the government controlling content.
Absolutely correct!   Imagine a Government sponsored commercial in your Netfix movie every 30 minutes, "This program is sponsored by the Democrats, keeping the Internet FREE and slow for everyone!"  Forced content.

If you want the Internet, PAY for it.  If you want to watch someone else's content over your Cable TV - Internet - IP/Skype Phone provider, PAY for it and you'll not be disappointed.   

We're really fortunate Net Neutering was stopped NOW, before this kind of Government control became completely normalized and expected.
It's like banning weather forcasts on every radio & TV station except NPR/PBS.  Want to hear the forecast, you *must* tune to NPR/PBS and wade through the anti-American garbage first.   Just like WW2 Germany - they had a free press, it was all government controlled.
All animals are created equal; Some just take longer to cook.   Survival is keeping an eye on those around you...

Offline topside

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 520
  • Gender: Male
  • Work with what is and toward what should be.
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #17 on: December 15, 2017, 10:58:42 AM »
Absolutely correct!   Imagine a Government sponsored commercial in your Netfix movie every 30 minutes, "This program is sponsored by the Democrats, keeping the Internet FREE and slow for everyone!"  Forced content.

If you want the Internet, PAY for it.  If you want to watch someone else's content over your Cable TV - Internet - IP/Skype Phone provider, PAY for it and you'll not be disappointed.   

We're really fortunate Net Neutering was stopped NOW, before this kind of Government control became completely normalized and expected.
It's like banning weather forcasts on every radio & TV station except NPR/PBS.  Want to hear the forecast, you *must* tune to NPR/PBS and wade through the anti-American garbage first.   Just like WW2 Germany - they had a free press, it was all government controlled.

Free market. Supply and demand. Quality of Service on Internet sells bits to those who can pay for them. Some think the Internet is a right - everyone should have access. But it's just a commodity like any other. And if access is life or death, those who can pay for it will live. Facts of life. So earn a living so you can afford it. Or, in this case, you can go to the library.

I'm going to generalize a little to bring up a problem I'm still unsettled on.

Same goes for health care. Those who can afford it will live longer. Those who can't will possibly die younger than if they had made more. Facts of life. All the health care shenanigans will make little difference overall except those who funnel the revenue stream their way. 

All the markets are tainted when excess rears it's head. The free market works to the point when the greed causes upheaval. Then wars of sorts start and the excess is addressed ... to some degree. A more peaceful solution is to neutralize the gap by law. But neutralization gone wrong is socialism that leads to Marxism. Give everyone a free standard car then those in charge make a killing selling gas to gain power (greed / excess) (from earlier example). There exists a gap when excess goes unaddressed, for example, when companies manufacture without care of the fact people need to breathe the air. Then regulation comes in ... and eventually the greed and corruption shows up (lurking Marxists) causing more harm than good on the regulation side.

It can be argued to make the excesses a state matter, but that doesn't fit when the impact is national. A citizen breathes good air in one state and bad in another.

I've concluded that there is no fool-proof solution. The best we can do is recognize that lawful free market is better than any alternative and when the greed / excess / corruption of men cause an imbalance that can't be ignored, then it has to be addressed either by fiat / law or revolution of some sort. 

So I'd add to the original intent for limited scope of the federal government ... which was military protection and the country's infrastructure. I'd generalize military protection to "emergency threats to the physical health of our citizens" that addresses cases like national disasters, air or water pollution.

I'm sure this will bring on the snarky comments and again bring about some RINO name-calling my way by those who claim government shouldn't intervene in free market at all - yes, I'm calling back to this because I've never felt settled on this one aspect of our discussions. It seems obvious to me that we had to find a way to check air and water pollution - companies were going to excess and not going to self-police it. I guess the problem does get resolved if you let a free market run ... eventually. Example: companies produce and put endless toxic waste in water and eventually all but die out except for those who can buy purifiers for them, their loved ones, and livestock. Problem solved, right? Even the population problem is addressed. Free market at work, right?

You might argue that someone would step in - men aren't that heartless. I'd agree that groups would arise (including conservatives) but without federal disruption the groups wouldn't bring much influence over the companies. And most would ignore the problem unless it was in their backyard ... at which time it may be very difficult to turn around.

The end of this post isn't about the Internet - that's an easy one to let the free market reign as letting companies offer levels of service doesn't cause substantial physical harm our citizens. In fact, it motivates a little to get a job! But I'm swimming in this looking for others with sensible alternatives or agreement. I'm looking to see how others (any reader of this post) resolve the conservative free market position with the occasional need to correct imbalance caused by excess under a conservative (constitutional) outlook. Should this go to another topic? Or does someone know of one already exist that I should look at?

Maybe move it to the new capitalism vs. socialism post?



Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 60998
  • Gender: Male
Net Neutrality-The End of Google’s Biggest Subsidy
« Reply #18 on: December 17, 2017, 11:37:53 AM »
Net Neutrality – The End of Google’s Biggest Subsidy
DECEMBER 16, 2017 / TOM LUONGO
Net Neutrality is gone.  Good riddance.

Lost in all of the theoretical debate about how evil ISPs will create a have/have-not divide in Internet access, is the reality that it already exists along with massive subsidies to the biggest bandwidth pigs on the planet – Facebook, Google, Twitter, Netflix and the porn industry.

Under Net Neutrality these platforms flourished along with the rise of the mobile internet, which is now arguably more important than the ‘desktop’ one in your home and office.  Google and Apple control the on-ramps to the mobile web in a way that Net Neutrality proponents can only dream the bandwidth providers like Comcast and AT&T could.

Because, in truth, they can’t.  Consumers are ultimately the ones who decide how much bandwidth costs, not the ISPs.  We decide how much we can afford these creature comforts like streaming Netflix while riding the bus or doing self-indulgent Instagram videos of our standing in line at the movies (if that’s even a thing anymore).

Non-Neutrality Pricing
Net Neutrality took pricing of bandwidth out of the hands of consumers.  It handed the profits from it to Google, Facebook and all the crappy advertisers spamming video ads, malware, scams, and the like everywhere.

By mandating ‘equal access’ and equal fee structures the advertisers behind Google and Facebook would spend their budgets without much thought or care.  Google and Facebook ad revenue soared under Net Neutrality because advertisers’ needs are not aligned with Google’s bottom line, but with consumers’.

And, because of that, the price paid to deliver the ad, i.e. Google’s cost of goods sold (COGS), thanks to Net Neutrality, was held artificially low.  And Google, Facebook and the Porn Industry pocketed the difference.

They grew uncontrollably.  In the case of Google and Facebook, uncontrollably powerful.

That difference was never passed onto the ISP who could then, in turn, pass it on to the consumer.

All thanks to Net Neutrality.

Undercapitalized Growth
With the rise of the mobile web bandwidth should have been getting cheaper and easier to acquire at a much faster rate than it has.  But, it couldn’t because of Net Neutrality.  It kept rates of return on new bandwidth projects and new technology suppressed.

Money the ISP’s should have been spending laying more fiber, putting up more cell towers, building better radios went to Google to fritter away on endless projects that never see the light of day.

The ISP’s actually suffered under Net Neutrality and so did the consumers.

And therefore, Net Neutrality guaranteed that the infrastructure for new high-speed bandwidth would grow at the slowest possible rate, still governed by the maximum the consumer was willing to pay for bandwidth, rather than what the consumer actually demanded.

And, once obtained that power was then used to punish anyone who held different opinions from the leadership in Silicon Valley.

Think it through, Net Neutrality not only subsidized intrusive advertising, phishing scams and on-demand porn but also the very censorship these powerful companies now feel is their sacred duty to enforce because the government is now controlled by the bad guys.

Getting rid of Net Neutrality will put the costs of delivering all of this worthless content back onto the people serving it.  YouTube will become more expensive for Google and all of the other content delivery networks.  Facebook video will eat into its bottom line.

The ISP’s can and should throttle them until they ‘pay their fair share,’ which they plainly have not been.

The Net effect of Net Neutrality is that your ISP may charge you more in the short run for Netflix or Hulu.  Or, more appropriately, Netflix and Hulu will have to charge you more and we’ll find out what the real cost of delivering 4k streaming content to your iPhone actually costs.

But, those costs will then go to the ISP’s such that they can respond to demand for more bandwidth.  Will they try and overcharge us?  Of course.  AT&T is just as bad as Google and/or Facebook.

But, we have the right to say no.  To stop using the services the way Net Neutrality encouraged us to through mispricing of service.  If the ISP’s want more customers then they’ll have to bring wire out to the hinterlands.

Inflated Costs, Poor Service

MORE~~~
https://tomluongo.me/2017/12/16/net-neutrality-the-end-of-googles-biggest-subsidy/
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Hoofer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4759
  • Gender: Male
  • HAM Radio - the last form of free expression
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #19 on: December 17, 2017, 02:53:48 PM »
Here's a few notes, what I would expect to start happening.

a.  A two or three tiered system of billing from your LOCAL ISP.
   One rate for services provided *within* their network, which would be the old rate (cable TV, and everything they own, or have a service agreement with.)
   A second rate for accessing services *outside* their network, Google, Youtube, Facebook, NFL, and all other non-streaming, low bandwidth.  Naturally they would be some overlap.
   A thrid rate for 4K, premium services, services "on demand" instead of scheduled during low bandwidth periods.  Amazon, NetFlicks would fall into that category.  You want to watch a streaming service "now", and forgot to plan ahead, you pay the highest.

b.  Businesses with point-to-point services would not be effected at all.  They are already paying for bandwidth, which is not shared.  On the other hand, accessing those businesses "in network" would be the same lowest price, "outside network" would have additional fees, sort of like Long Distance or International calling.

c.  Search Engines, which currently are "in bed" with businesses, directing traffic away from competitors and toward their favorites  (Google & Amazon for example), could be billed, much like dialing 411 or 0 for operator assistance.

d.  How... is an ISP going to try and keep their customer's "on the reservation", within their network?  Stay with Comcast, and not be bombarded with Ads - go elsewhere, and you'll get Advertising, and LOTS of it.  Couple that with a 2nd or 3rd pay rate, it'll make customers PISSED, until they learn the hard way, nothing is free.   Comcast makes money selling the Ads, and charging you at a higher rate.   Want cheap internet access with unlimited bandwidth - nope, not unless you're prepared to stick within the ISP's guidelines.

Something also needs to be said about bandwidth.   "I'm paying for 50meg, and they're throttling me!!!" - comes from the customer who has a contract that says, "Up to 50meg", and it's always Download speed, uploading is 1/10th of that.  They *might* pay $40 a month, and actually think that's expensive, yet it doesn't really cover the cost of bringing internet into their home.  These are SHARED services, and maybe oversold 10x or more, depending on the bandwidth.  Just brining the fiber into a business, from the street, a few hundred yards can easily cost $3000-$10,000.  Rates for boring underground are $10 per foot... before you pull in the duct work and fiber, penetrate the concrete walls, etc.  Often those costs are split between the business and ISP, and not a part of the monthly contract.  By comparison, dialup service should cost $40 a month, after you've paid a few thousand to bring the lines into your house.

Business typically purchase symmetrical bandwidth, same data rate up and down - but it usually goes from one point to another point, connecting two offices, or a parts house to a parts manufacturer/supplier.  They can easily pay $1500~$3000 a month for a 20meg pipe.  If it's a data center, the price for a 10Gbit pipe could $30k ~ $50k per month.  The longer distance, the higher the prices.  They also buy 2 or more "paths" dedicated to them, many times using 2 or 3 providers - and are very particular about keeping the routes physically separated by great distances.  They might have a path from Florida to New York that is very low latency and direct, but the backup path goes west thru Georgia, Nebraska, Iowa, Pennsylvania, and finally to New York, higher latency, but what's few milliseconds when your business is completely dependent on Internet?   Businesses pay big dollars for this - not a conspiracy, or trying to squeeze out the little guy, and they expect to have 100% of bandwidth 24/7 too.   They will not be effected by any changes in Net Neutering.

BTW.... Jimmy Kimmel's program is piped out over these expensive Internet point-to-point services.   It is totally naive to think CBS-NBC-ABC-FOX are sending time sensitive broadcast material over the *same* pipes Aunt Maye is looking up Pecan Pie recipes.  Now if Jimmy Kimmel wants to SHARE his Internet pipe with others, his broadcast would take DAYS for each episode to traverse the country.  Nobody would bother watching Kimmel, and the public at large might become a little wiser.

What about Google, Amazon, Netflicks, etc.?   They pay too... but their cost of doing business is simply passed on to you, the customer.

If people like Bernie Sanders came along and removed the profit incentive, much like Net Neutering did, it's just a matter of time before the infrastructure collapses, and nobody has reliable Internet service.   There is a lot of money tied up in this business, it's the high volume of traffic that's kept it abnormally cheap, all that can change with regulation.
All animals are created equal; Some just take longer to cook.   Survival is keeping an eye on those around you...

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 60998
  • Gender: Male
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #20 on: December 17, 2017, 03:14:19 PM »
I see another possible player in the market, Amazon service, where they supply free connectivity for buying a said amount over the year as long as you accept their ads.
So many variations here, but I can an expansion of coverage in several areas.
I'm not saying they will, but it's a ripe opportunity for them to jump on.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Hoofer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4759
  • Gender: Male
  • HAM Radio - the last form of free expression
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #21 on: December 17, 2017, 03:20:27 PM »
I see another possible player in the market, Amazon service, where they supply free connectivity for buying a said amount over the year as long as you accept their ads.
So many variations here, but I can an expansion of coverage in several areas.
I'm not saying they will, but it's a ripe opportunity for them to jump on.

The current "carrot & stick" is FREE 2 day SHIPPING... it is not, just built into the price, and Bezos is still making lots of money.

Point being, there are many areas where those extra costs can be recooped.
All animals are created equal; Some just take longer to cook.   Survival is keeping an eye on those around you...

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 60998
  • Gender: Male
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #22 on: December 17, 2017, 04:28:17 PM »
The current "carrot & stick" is FREE 2 day SHIPPING... it is not, just built into the price, and Bezos is still making lots of money.

Point being, there are many areas where those extra costs can be recooped.
Here's what I see taking place.
Amazon will have tens of thousands of drones in the air all over the US in the next decade and Amazon can beam uninterrupted internet service, cell links etc.
I see them as a huge player in the future.
Hell, I wouldn't be surprised to see them flying dirigibles as charging stations for long flights, and the blimps act as bounce signal units for satellites.
You're correct, there's no such thing as free.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline VVet69

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Gender: Male
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2018, 12:36:22 PM »
I think in addition to the repeal of Net Neutrality that the ISP's should be classified as Common Carriers and subject to a similar regulatory oversight as the original Public Switched Telecoms, with some adjustment for the Internet requirements. Allowing Content Creators to also own the ISPs is a conflict of interest and stifles competition.

1st Case in point: Cable providers allowed to engage in activities to prevent other competitive providers or Community Broadband from being deployed where the entrenched provider is refusing to expand wired coverage or bandwidth due to NO competition.  There are numerous examples of this; for example:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/10/comcast-sues-nashville-to-halt-rules-that-help-google-fiber/
 
2nd Second case in point: Rural connectivity access  -- Cellular or Satellite is NOT an equivalent for wired broadband (Cable or Fiber) in either throughput or reliability, not to mention the cost and data caps.  Here is a good example: I live in a rural area of SC. I have ONLY ONE option -- DSL (advertised at "up to" 6Mb/s but usually more like 1-3Mb/s. There is a major cable provider cable drop less than a mile from my house, but to get that I will have to pay ~$15000 for them to run the cable to me, and then any OTHER connections to that cable are allowed at no cost to the other connections other than the subscription fee.  How is that fair?  They didn't charge all their original customers a connect fee when the lines were run years ago... Also note that the entrenched ISP's have been collecting a fee from each customer to be used to expand coverage to rural areas , which they have largely NOT done. 

Thank goodness I am going to actually get FTTH from our electric co-op in the next year or so... And this is JUST an ISP selling connections and bandwidth only. 

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 60998
  • Gender: Male
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #24 on: January 27, 2018, 01:04:14 PM »
I probably should have posted this here instead.

AT&T ad: Facebook, Google should have neutrality rules too

AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson wrote, “Congressional action is needed to establish an ‘Internet Bill of Rights’ that applies to all internet companies and guarantees neutrality, transparency, openness, non-discrimination and privacy protection for all internet users.”

Stephenson posted the ad in the New York Times, Washington Post, and other national news outlets on Wednesday.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai repealed the agency’s 2015 net neutrality order which prohibited ISPs from blocking, throttling, or discriminating against content. Proponents of net neutrality argue that America needs the regulation to prevent ISPs such as Comcast or AT&T from unfairly blocking or censoring the Internet, however, the FCC and Breitbart News’s Allum Bokhari argued that under net neutrality, content providers such as Facebook and Google have censored the Internet, stifled conservative and alternative voices, and serve as a greater threat to free speech compared to ISPs.

You can read his short letter here.

https://www.axios.com/net-neutrality-rules-for-facebook-google-att-34f3f5f0-56ad-492b-9db1-34717582f716.html


Bad idea. So they want the Govt to create a set of rules to govern behavior regarding the Internet?
Does anyone else see this as a problem? They want to call it a Bill of Rights, the thing is, govt did not give us a Bill of Rights, we the people set restrictions on govt via our Bill of Rights.
So when dealing with Internet Providers, just follow existing law, but when dealing with users such as Faceplant or Twatter, it's their right to stifle speech, like it or not, our First Amendment allows them to block any speech they don't like, but it's also our right to avoid them at all costs.

We don't need new laws, what we need is govt out of the Internet altogether, stop stealing taxpayers money to support the likes of Marxist Google, cut them off at the knees which would open up the market and level the playing field.
Let the free mkt dictate winners and losers.
Why would AT&T want something like this, unless it ties the hands of their competition?

Libs are funny, they always want govt dictating laws that govern behavior, yet never once consider the option of free mkt dictating rules of behavior.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Billy's bayonet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5573
  • Gender: Male
  • Fighting Communism since 1969
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #25 on: January 27, 2018, 03:24:12 PM »
Let us all remember to thank Al Gore....the "Father" of the internet.... :drool:
Evil operates best when under a disguise

Deplorable and Proud of it

Online walkstall

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24241
  • Gender: Male
  • WYSIWYG
Re: FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
« Reply #26 on: January 27, 2018, 03:37:43 PM »
Let us all remember to thank Al Gore....the "Father" of the internet.... :drool:


The father of G/W.
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession.  I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.  ~ Ronald Reagan ~

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

 

Powered by EzPortal