Net Neutrality Repeal

And the greatest con in American history continues...

Bunch of fucking morons.

I personally can't wait for vital to get slowed down because gibby can't afford to pay att to run vital at normal speeds. So much winning.

colintrax wrote:

I personally can't wait for vital to get slowed down because gibby can't afford to pay att to run vital at normal speeds. So much winning.

... some of these rural guys might lose access to it entirely.

They can watch 700 club with their rabbit ears instead.

colintrax wrote:

I personally can't wait for vital to get slowed down because gibby can't afford to pay att to run vital at normal speeds. So much winning.

akillerwombat wrote:

... some of these rural guys might lose access to it entirely.

I live in a town with no red lights, the only companies being farms, a shooting range, a gas station, a petting zoo, and an animal auction. My Internet is already fucked.

colintrax wrote:

I live in a town with no red lights, the only companies being farms, a shooting range, a gas station, a petting zoo, and an animal auction. My Internet is already fucked.

Good luck dude.

Firstly, anything the government gets involved in is effed up. The governments role in this is that they should build a government internet system and give everyone free access. Just like the public road system. However the "net neutrality was a joke" glad it was repealed. Not really sure what everyone is crying about. They got along fine just 3 years ago without it. Everyone is crying that ISPs can monitor your traffic, boo bad, but the reality is that google and facebook already do that and nobody complains. Hmmm.
I know there is more to it but the government just effs everything up.
TM

ToolMaker wrote:

Firstly, anything the government gets involved in is effed up. The governments role in this is that they should build a government internet system and give everyone free access. Just like the public road system. However the "net neutrality was a joke" glad it was repealed. Not really sure what everyone is crying about. They got along fine just 3 years ago without it. Everyone is crying that ISPs can monitor your traffic, boo bad, but the reality is that google and facebook already do that and nobody complains. Hmmm.
I know there is more to it but the government just effs everything up.
TM

It seems you don`t even know what is about, but agree because it has Obama name attached to it. Oh well...

colintrax wrote:

I personally can't wait for vital to get slowed down because gibby can't afford to pay att to run vital at normal speeds. So much winning.

Pretty certain you'll see netflix and such get throttled back but that's just a small part of it.
You are already getting censored by google and prevented from seeing what they don't
want you to see. But people think google is making life easier so they are OK with that.
Every app on you phone (per standard auth from google) requires you to approve any and
all the things people are complaining about. And internet on your phone is way more used than
at home.

North Korea called they want their ideas back

ToolMaker wrote:

Firstly, anything the government gets involved in is effed up. The governments role in this is that they should build a government internet system and give everyone free access. Just like the public road system. However the "net neutrality was a joke" glad it was repealed. Not really sure what everyone is crying about. They got along fine just 3 years ago without it. Everyone is crying that ISPs can monitor your traffic, boo bad, but the reality is that google and facebook already do that and nobody complains. Hmmm.
I know there is more to it but the government just effs everything up.
TM

I hope you are better at making tools than understanding this.

ToolMaker wrote:

Firstly, anything the government gets involved in is effed up. The governments role in this is that they should build a government internet system and give everyone free access. Just like the public road system. However the "net neutrality was a joke" glad it was repealed. Not really sure what everyone is crying about. They got along fine just 3 years ago without it. Everyone is crying that ISPs can monitor your traffic, boo bad, but the reality is that google and facebook already do that and nobody complains. Hmmm.
I know there is more to it but the government just effs everything up.
TM

kongols wrote:

It seems you don`t even know what is about, but agree because it has Obama name attached to it. Oh well...

You're right I don't know what ALL of it is about but I do know that if it's a public interest
utility the government should build the network and give free (and equal) access. Right now what I
hear about is many folks complaining that their ISPs will sell their history (exactly what
google and facebook do). While I don't like ANYONE doing that, if you give a monopoly
to just a few they will become so big and powerful there will be no stopping them.
So why do you bring up Obama? Next you're going to call me racist?
TM

ToolMaker wrote:

You're right I don't know what ALL of it is about but I do know that if it's a public interest
utility the government should build the network and give free (and equal) access. Right now what I
hear about is many folks complaining that their ISPs will sell their history (exactly what
google and facebook do). While I don't like ANYONE doing that, if you give a monopoly
to just a few they will become so big and powerful there will be no stopping them.
So why do you bring up Obama? Next you're going to call me racist?
TM

Because that is how it usually works. I doubt you`re an exception.

kongols wrote:

It seems you don`t even know what is about, but agree because it has Obama name attached to it. Oh well...

ToolMaker wrote:

You're right I don't know what ALL of it is about but I do know that if it's a public interest
utility the government should build the network and give free (and equal) access. Right now what I
hear about is many folks complaining that their ISPs will sell their history (exactly what
google and facebook do). While I don't like ANYONE doing that, if you give a monopoly
to just a few they will become so big and powerful there will be no stopping them.
So why do you bring up Obama? Next you're going to call me racist?
TM

kongols wrote:

Because that is how it usually works. I doubt you`re an exception.

You had it in the first sentence,
"Because that is how it usually works." When you don't like something accuse them of not liking Obama.
That's about as dumb as someone saying the only reason you like it is because you're and "O" fan.
My god, I wonder how the internet survived all these years before net neutrality. It's a miracle I tell you.
TM

Toolmaker, it seems we both agree the Internet is already awful. But somehow you think giving more people room to fuck it up is good?? Ya know not everything the government does is bad. I like my public land, paved roads, and employee protections. Maybe you'd be better off in a different country, I heard you can avoid the government pretty good in the amazon. Join a tribe down there and be your own man. Lots of face paint and ya ain't gotta wear pants.

ToolMaker wrote:

You had it in the first sentence,
"Because that is how it usually works." When you don't like something accuse them of not liking Obama.
That's about as dumb as someone saying the only reason you like it is because you're and "O" fan.
My god, I wonder how the internet survived all these years before net neutrality. It's a miracle I tell you.
TM

The problem with your argument is that it all hinges on the idea that no one will attempt to exploit the people via this change but history has shown us time and time again that when people become aware that something holds this much power the first thing they will do is exploit it.

As someone who has made a living via the internet for the last 20ish years in various countries with various forms of internet I have very little faith the internet will remain as it is now (or was 3 years ago) going into the future. Capitalism is slowly bleeding out those who reside in this country and this change in course for the internet is yet another paper cut to the wrists of the poor.

Its not about selling your history its about looking at the sites and services you use the most and saying we will throttle your speed or block those sites and services unless you pay us a premium. As it was the company could limit your data then throttle or charge more but it didnt matter what sites or services you used that data on.

kongols wrote:

Because that is how it usually works. I doubt you`re an exception.

ToolMaker wrote:

You had it in the first sentence,
"Because that is how it usually works." When you don't like something accuse them of not liking Obama.
That's about as dumb as someone saying the only reason you like it is because you're and "O" fan.
My god, I wonder how the internet survived all these years before net neutrality. It's a miracle I tell you.
TM

akillerwombat wrote:

The problem with your argument is that it all hinges on the idea that no one will attempt to exploit the people via this change but history has shown us time and time again that when people become aware that something holds this much power the first thing they will do is exploit it.

As someone who has made a living via the internet for the last 20ish years in various countries with various forms of internet I have very little faith the internet will remain as it is now (or was 3 years ago) going into the future. Capitalism is slowly bleeding out those who reside in this country and this change in course for the internet is yet another paper cut to the wrists of the poor.

You realize that I don't disagree with much of what you're saying. But I don't think what we had was good.
And the point of view that anything is better than nothing in this case doesn't fly.
I think it was a template for a few to grow to gargantuan size while giving the illusion of protection.
All the while, the very thing you think you are being protected against is happening.
TM

early wrote:

Its not about selling your history its about looking at the sites and services you use the most and saying we will throttle your speed or block those sites and services unless you pay us a premium. As it was the company could limit your data then throttle or charge more but it didnt matter what sites or services you used that data on.

Exactly.

At the end of the day all that's really going to happen to me personally is that I'm going to have to pay more but for a lot of poor communities they are essentially being pushed out of a public park for no reason.

early wrote:

Its not about selling your history its about looking at the sites and services you use the most and saying we will throttle your speed or block those sites and services unless you pay us a premium. As it was the company could limit your data then throttle or charge more but it didnt matter what sites or services you used that data on.

What do you think is happening when you google a product and websites
come up with "sponsored content" next to it on the first page?
If you don't pay google you don't get to be there. Hmmm
TM

ToolMaker wrote:

What do you think is happening when you google a product and websites
come up with "sponsored content" next to it on the first page?
If you don't pay google you don't get to be there. Hmmm
TM

That's better than having google blocked by your provider.... which is essentially the door that is being opened by this passing.

early wrote:

Its not about selling your history its about looking at the sites and services you use the most and saying we will throttle your speed or block those sites and services unless you pay us a premium. As it was the company could limit your data then throttle or charge more but it didnt matter what sites or services you used that data on.

ToolMaker wrote:

What do you think is happening when you google a product and websites
come up with "sponsored content" next to it on the first page?
If you don't pay google you don't get to be there. Hmmm
TM

You can choose what website you use for searches. You dont have as much freedom when it comes to isp you use. It will be a long time until you have that level of broadband choice.

colintrax wrote:

Toolmaker, it seems we both agree the Internet is already awful. But somehow you think giving more people room to fuck it up is good?? Ya know not everything the government does is bad. I like my public land, paved roads, and employee protections. Maybe you'd be better off in a different country, I heard you can avoid the government pretty good in the amazon. Join a tribe down there and be your own man. Lots of face paint and ya ain't gotta wear pants.

"But somehow you think giving more people room to fuck it up is good??" Yea, no.
I think a few companies already have the means to do everything everyone is complaining about.
Maybe if we heard this big of a shit storm about how we are being manipulated by a select few
companies I'd join the chorus. But it just seems everyone is saying XYZ is going to happen when
in fact it already is. Didn't google just block Amazon customers from watching youtube?
As far as politicians go, their only job is to get re-elected, and they are pretty damn good at it.
It's funny you bring up the roads. Here in CA, one party has a "super majority" and can pass anything
they want. They just passed a "new gas tax" to "fix the roads" it doesn't matter that they already claim
money from gas sales to fix the roads but divert it to the "general fund". But no, we need more money.
So the new tax money is just now being found out how it will get spent. Guess what, only 10% will go to
roadways, and of that 10% NONE of it will go to fix any of the roads that the cars use but to implement
bicycle lanes. Yep, you just keep patting those government folks on the back for such a great job.
While I believe we need government and infrastructure. I do believe we can do better.
Hey where is that place? I kinda like the idea of no pants

early wrote:

Its not about selling your history its about looking at the sites and services you use the most and saying we will throttle your speed or block those sites and services unless you pay us a premium. As it was the company could limit your data then throttle or charge more but it didnt matter what sites or services you used that data on.

ToolMaker wrote:

What do you think is happening when you google a product and websites
come up with "sponsored content" next to it on the first page?
If you don't pay google you don't get to be there. Hmmm
TM

early wrote:

You can choose what website you use for searches. You dont have as much freedom when it comes to isp you use. It will be a long time until you have that level of broadband choice.

While that is true, the internet we know today will be entirely different in just 10 years.
I really don't think that this is the end of the internet. But I'm just one guy.

ToolMaker wrote:

"But somehow you think giving more people room to fuck it up is good??" Yea, no.
I think a few companies already have the means to do everything everyone is complaining about.
Maybe if we heard this big of a shit storm about how we are being manipulated by a select few
companies I'd join the chorus. But it just seems everyone is saying XYZ is going to happen when
in fact it already is. Didn't google just block Amazon customers from watching youtube?
As far as politicians go, their only job is to get re-elected, and they are pretty damn good at it.
It's funny you bring up the roads. Here in CA, one party has a "super majority" and can pass anything
they want. They just passed a "new gas tax" to "fix the roads" it doesn't matter that they already claim
money from gas sales to fix the roads but divert it to the "general fund". But no, we need more money.
So the new tax money is just now being found out how it will get spent. Guess what, only 10% will go to
roadways, and of that 10% NONE of it will go to fix any of the roads that the cars use but to implement
bicycle lanes. Yep, you just keep patting those government folks on the back for such a great job.
While I believe we need government and infrastructure. I do believe we can do better.
Hey where is that place? I kinda like the idea of no pants

You acknowledge that it's a bad thing that Google can block Amazon users while using a Google product, well, this passing essentially makes the whole internet a product for certain providers.

My thoughts are that behind this all there are several Big Cable and Dish companies who are being undercut by net streaming services to the point where they may be facing bankruptcy X amount of years down the road shall us normal folks continue to cut the cord.

The government can't afford to lose the tax revenue from the 10's of thousands of employees should these companies fold up shop.

This whole smoke and mirror show called net neutrality is nothing but a disguised bailout and backroom deal to keep the likes of the Big Cable & Dish providers in business until they can figure out how to combat Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, Etc.

We can cut the cord and stream so much cheaper than cable or dish right now that the Big providers are screaming uncle. Net Neutrality is going to close the gap and force a lot of people to probably switch back to cable or dish.

It has nothing to do with any of you or your "right to internet access," it as about money.

Ajit Pai appointed to FCC by President Obama. WTF

mxtech1 wrote:

My thoughts are that behind this all there are several Big Cable and Dish companies who are being undercut by net streaming services to the point where they may be facing bankruptcy X amount of years down the road shall us normal folks continue to cut the cord.

The government can't afford to lose the tax revenue from the 10's of thousands of employees should these companies fold up shop.

This whole smoke and mirror show called net neutrality is nothing but a disguised bailout and backroom deal to keep the likes of the Big Cable & Dish providers in business until they can figure out how to combat Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, Etc.

We can cut the cord and stream so much cheaper than cable or dish right now that the Big providers are screaming uncle. Net Neutrality is going to close the gap and force a lot of people to probably switch back to cable or dish.

It has nothing to do with any of you or your "right to internet access," it as about money.

They could enforce data caps under the net neutrality rules.

Toolmaker you seem to understand this is bad but are just sticking to you're guns, and the party in charge. What's going on with Amazon and google is fucked, but I can buy a Google phone and an amazon kindle. In the end, not a big deal to me.
However I only have 2 Internet service providers out here, att and comcast. And att is buying comcast.... so yeah. Whatever att wants to do they can, my only option is to go without internet. And this ain't 1990 anymore. How many places you know of still have paper job applications? You know how many classes I've taken that involve online work, or online resources? A shit ton. We HAVE to have Internet these days.