FCC net neutrality

[Ironcitysteelers]

Anyone else following this, and how the fcc is going to kill this law. Gotta say I’m not ******* happy at all. We’re going to have to pay seprerate bills(amounts) per service you use. Say ...video, YouTube, gaming, social media ...etc. so instead of a one set fee for internet access, you will pay (potentially) per service you want.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/11/22/whats-stake-fccs-net-neutrality-vote/888870001/

 

[deljzc]

I have a few friends on facebook that are up in arms about it. One in the computer science industry for the government.

The more I read up about it, I'm not so convinced it's like the end of the world yet.

First, this is a regulation, not a law. So new administration and a new FCC chairman and you might get a completely different rule. So I'm not so sure Comcast and Fios are just going to start abusing their newly given freedoms like the doomsday people are saying.

Second, the basis of the 2014 regulation in the first place was on pretty shaky legal ground. The whole idea of comparing the internet to 1935 telephone lines might not hold up to lawsuits, which I'm pretty sure Comcast, Fios, et. al. were prepared to file.

Third, how did we survive BEFORE this started in 2014? Like many of the regulations under Obama that Trump overturns, the doomsayers talk nothing of B.O. (before Obama). To them it's like we couldn't exist unless Obama was there to save us with his regulation expertise. The internet was fine from 1995 to 2014 without this regulation. I don't see much advantage of internet providers systematically trying to control the customers' access to the internet (or make it more difficult). And for all the rural areas they might have a monopoly over, having different rules in those areas vs. the big metropolitan areas (where you are in competition and trying to get people to use your ISP and where all the money is made/lost) is going to bring the Feds down on them hard and quick.

I just don't see A+B = C add up like some of the people against this are saying. I'm not saying I like it, but a lot of the gloom and doom right now is what could happen, not necessarily what will happen.

 

[scraps]

 

[Steelin]

I had always heard that Obamanet was a bad thing. That it paved the way for squelching conservative voices even more heavy handedly. I'm not sure but how great could it be if the big zero was for it?

 

[madinsomniac]

Look, it's probably time to look at the net as a utility and not let cable and phone companies own access, but this particular law needed some adjustments at least....

 

[Spike]

What was there before Net Neutrality?



It is kind of interesting that within 24 hours of the DOJ opting to block the ATT-Time Warner merger because cause it gives a distributor too much control over the way it treats content, the FCC said it will vote to give internet service providers more control over how they treat content.

 

[deljzc]

What was there before Net Neutrality?



It is kind of interesting that within 24 hours of the DOJ opting to block the ATT-Time Warner merger because cause it gives a distributor too much control over the way it treats content, the FCC said it will vote to give internet service providers more control over how they treat content.

Maybe the Trump administration would rather control this sort of thing differently than Obama.

I mean, Obama let every merger under the sun happen. The bigger the better. And he loved regulations.

Maybe it's just as effective to keep companies small, regulate only to protect free markets and prevent monopolies but keep the regulatory language to a minimum.

I can actually see both sides of that argument and I might prefer the latter.

 

[ark steel]

My belief is that, if the government is this interested in "making the internet better, that ain't what it's about...