Well. It's official guys. It's dead.
Thoughts?
Well. It's official guys. It's dead.
Thoughts?
Re: R.I.P. Net Neutrality
By: Elaek to All on Thu Dec 14 2017 12:47 pm
Well. It's official guys. It's dead.
Thoughts?
It feels like a step backwards. I understand there are reasons some people argue in favor of not having net neutrality, but overall I think net neutrality is better (at least for the consumer). We pay money for good internet service, so I think we should be able to have access to all the internet has to offer.
You pay your ISP for service, and then you might pay Netflix for their streaming service, but now your ISP might want to add an additional charge yet again for accessing Netflix at a reasonable speed? How about no.
Nightfox
what we CAN do is vote with our wallets. we can go to another isp or
change our ways. i hated my huge cable bill so i dropped everything except internet and replaced it with oooma and slingtv. no more hidden charges and other bullshit.
Re: R.I.P. Net Neutrality
By: Elaek to All on Thu Dec 14 2017 12:47 pm
Well. It's official guys. It's dead.
Thoughts?
It feels like a step backwards.
Re: R.I.P. Net Neutrality
By: MRO to Nightfox on Thu Dec 14 2017 05:34 pm
what we CAN do is vote with our wallets. we can go to another isp or
This potentially affects all ISPs. If all ISPs in a customer's area end up throttling network speed for certain services, then there won't be a good ISP for a customer to switch to.
Well. It's official guys. It's dead.
Thoughts?
what we CAN do is vote with our wallets. we can go to another isp or
This potentially affects all ISPs. If all ISPs in a customer's area end up throttling network speed for certain services, then there won't be a good ISP for a customer to switch to.
change our ways. i hated my huge cable bill so i dropped everything except internet and replaced it with oooma and slingtv. no more hidden charges and other bullshit.
A few years ago, I had internet and basic TV from a cable company. I called them to ask to drop my basic TV service, but they said my bill would go up. Stuff like that doesn't make sense to me. And compared to their basic TV
Well. It's official guys. It's dead.
Thoughts?
It feels like a step backwards.
How so? The public Internet was never government-regulated. And now it still isn't. How is it a "step backwards" to keep things the way they have always been?
This potentially affects all ISPs. If all ISPs in a customer's area
end up throttling network speed for certain services, then there won't
be a good ISP for a customer to switch to.
But those are just *ifs*. We shouldn't regulate services that could *potentially* be monolopized because of theories of evil corporate behavior.
There are countries without net neutrality that we can look to for examples of what could happen. Portual, for instance, doesn't have net neutrality, and internet providers in Portugal can charge extra to allow users to use services like messaging (Skype, Apple FaceTime, etc.), social media (Facebook, etc.).
One of my concern would be port blocking. Like vpn, ssh etc. they'll say if for blocking piracy and save the children.
One of my concern would be port blocking. Like vpn, ssh etc. they'll say if for blocking piracy and save the children.
It feels like a step backwards. I understand there are reasons some people argue in favor of not having net neutrality, but overall I think net neutrality is better (at least for the consumer). We pay money for good internet service, so I think we should be able to have access to all the internet has to offer.
I'd love a competitive landscape like Mr. Pai thinks we have, but we don't. Most people can have either cable or DSL (or both) coming into their house, each provided by one provider. If you have multiple DSL offerings, they're all coming in over your phone company's DSL for the most part.
In this scenario, you can't vote with your dollars, since there's nowhere to go.
Elaek <elaek@VERT/CPUGOD> wrote:
Well. It's official guys. It's dead.
Thoughts?
We will have to get modem and landlines ?
But those are just *ifs*. We shouldn't regulate services that could *potentially* be monolopized because of theories of evil corporate behavior.
Some ISPs already block some ports, such as the SMTP port. I'm not sure that's related to net neutrality.
Local telcos and cable companies have to make up lost revenues because of their crappy service (both) and technology obsolescence (anyone here order
a land line on purpose lately? Received a fax?)
Running toll booths on the internet seems like an obvious choice.
for a long time). Depending on what area one lives in in my metro area, there may be 2-3 different options for DSL, but it's fairly fragmented.
Like here, they want to sell a 4K service when what they offer is not even decent HD it's like over compressed 720P on some channel i even see interlacing artifact. they never seen a good 1080P blue ray.
Re: R.I.P. Net Neutrality
By: Digital Man to Nightfox on Thu Dec 14 2017 05:32 pm
Well. It's official guys. It's dead.
Thoughts?
It feels like a step backwards.
How so? The public Internet was never government-regulated. And now it still isn't. How is it a "step backwards" to keep things the way they have always been?
With the Net Neutrality rules, internet providers were not allowed to favor certain web sites over others. Now that that has been repealed, internet providers could start doing that. So in that sense it feels like a step backwards.
And the net neutrality rules were under the FCC - Aren't they a government entity?
Some ISPs already block some ports, such as the SMTP port. I'm not sure that's related to net neutrality.
The pretext is that smtp protocol is weak and it's easy to send spam trough it.
I always get pissed when I compare terrestrial HDTV with my cable and see what it's capable of. Overcompressed 720P is exactly what I'm getting.
That, to me, would make sense. I found out, years ago, that it's really
easy to forge an E-mail, was able to do it with a local SMTP server, and a telnet client. Never left the local server, but still...
And the net neutrality rules were under the FCC - Aren't they a government entity?
One of my concern would be port blocking. Like vpn, ssh etc. they'll say if for blocking piracy and save the children.
Until the Obama administration officially declared net neutrality, it was not regulated. There was only that small window between that declaration and its repeal where it was. I did not notice a difference between when it wasn't and was, so I am wondering if there will be much difference now.
Until the Obama administration officially declared net neutrality, it was not regulated. There was only that small window between that declaration and its repeal where it was. I did not notice a difference between when it wasn't and was, so I am wondering if there will be much difference now.
I didn't notice a difference either, but now that net neutrality has been repealed, the possibility is there for internet providers to start making changes that we as consumers might not like. In addition to their base price
There are only a handful of internet backbone providers, and there's a 99% chance that anything you access on the Internet goes through one of their lines, or through one of their routers. These companies are CenturyLink (Who just bought Level3), Telia, NTT, Cogent, GTT and Tata Comunications. keep an eye on them and see what they do.
Netflix had to pay Comcast to give their traffic the same priority as other services before Net Neutrality was put in place. AT&T would throttle "unlimited" users if they went over a certain amount of data (5GB/month), this actually became a very grey area under the new NN rules, and AT&T upped the limit to something like 22GB.
I don't like the idea that an isp owner, who might also own a streaming service, could do something to make it more difficult to access a rival's streaming service. Unless you live in an area where there is only one provider (I know some do), I cannot see where that'd be good business practice, though.
They did that before the last administration declared net neutrality, they did it during the period it was supposedly neutral, and will probably continue to. At least, they do so on port 25 and I assume whatever other ports they want.
I didn't notice a difference either, but now that net neutrality has been repealed, the possibility is there for internet providers to start making changes that we as consumers might not like. In addition to their base pr
I see your side of it, but I guess I am thinking there was nothing to stop them from doing it before net neutrality was policy and they, for the most part, did not.
Is that the same NTT as in NTT Data, which owns contract employment companies?
Re: R.I.P. Net Neutrality
By: DaiTengu to Dumas Walker on Sun Dec 17 2017 11:25 am
Netflix had to pay Comcast to give their traffic the same priority as other services before Net Neutrality was put in place. AT&T would throttle "unlimited" users if they went over a certain amount of data (5GB/month), this actually became a very grey area under the new NN rules, and AT&T upped the limit to something like 22GB.
Don't forget that AT&T at one point prevented users on "unlimited" plans from using Facetime.
Re: R.I.P. Net Neutrality
By: Dumas Walker to NIGHTFOX on Sun Dec 17 2017 14:12:00
Screw broadband.. let's all go back to dial up! ;)
What concerns me is how the big providers see people making money on the >internet and want to shake down the content providers for using "their" pipes. >AT&T used that argument, claiming that Netflix was getting a free ride. Except >I pay my ISP, and I'm sure Netflix pays theirs.
It's just that's it's a multifaceted situation. For most people neutrality is >not only port blocking. But also create package for example where you get >unlimited Spotify but yet have the meter on music coming from google music or >apple music for example. It's still audio data, why privilege one over the >other ? Because the company gave money to your provider? And you, if you want >to start a internet product? will you have to pay all along the way to reach >customer ? how small guys will start new stuff? That's the main concern.
Screw broadband.. let's all go back to dial up! ;)
Were they doing that before? I understand being concerned about it, for sure, since some of the providers are owned by companies that also own pieces of the entertainment industry, etc., but where any of them doing things like that before net neutrality and, if they were, did they stop?
They stopped in 2015. Comcast is keeping their nose clean because they made promises to not to favor NBC Universal when they bought them. Those promises are set to expire in 2018 or 2019, and you'll see NBC Universal traffic not apply to your quota, and Hulu won't buffer -- but Netflix will.
That ought to frustrate a lot of customers who are paying for Netflix subscriptions. I wonder how many customers will blame Netflix and drop them in favor of other streaming services..
They stopped in 2015. Comcast is keeping their nose clean because they made promises to not to favor NBC Universal when they bought them. Those promises are set to expire in 2018 or 2019, and you'll see NBC Universal traffic not apply to your quota, and Hulu won't buffer -- but Netflix will.
Re: R.I.P. Net Neutrality
By: Dumas Walker to NIGHTFOX on Sun Dec 17 2017 14:12:00
Screw broadband.. let's all go back to dial up! ;)
Screw broadband.. let's all go back to dial up! ;)
I still offer it and, thanks to a persistent user, it is actually working again. :)
Screw broadband.. let's all go back to dial up! ;)
I still offer it and, thanks to a persistent user, it is actually working again. :)
Screw broadband.. let's all go back to dial up! ;)
I still offer it and, thanks to a persistent user, it is actually
working again. :)
How do you offer broadband? Back around 2000 I used a Linux server with
... but or pleasure if the banks and search sites would make text friendly systems available like they had in the late 90's i think it would work.
Screw broadband.. let's all go back to dial up! ;)
I still offer it and, thanks to a persistent user, it is actually working >DW> again. :)
How do you offer broadband? Back around 2000 I used a Linux server with caller
I have an extra home phoneline I am thinking about setting up as a dial in line, I wonder if the cheap USB modems would work.
I have an extra home phoneline I am thinking about setting up as a dial in line, I wonder if the cheap USB modems would work.
I got a 56K USR Courier off ebay for like $20. I just had to get a serial
USB cable for it.
| Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
|---|---|
| Location: | Prospect, CT |
| Users: | 325 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 28:21:24 |
| Calls: | 508 |
| Messages: | 220003 |