Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
WASHINGTON — The Federal Communications Commission will propose new rules that allow Internet service providers to offer a faster lane through which to send video and other content to consumers, as long as a content company is willing to pay for it, according to people briefed on the proposals.
The proposed rules are a complete turnaround for the F.C.C. on the subject of so-called net neutrality, the principle that Internet users should have equal ability to see any content they choose, and that no content providers should be discriminated against in providing their offerings to consumers.
The F.C.C.'s previous rules governing net neutrality were thrown out by a federal appeals court this year. The court said those rules had essentially treated Internet service providers as public utilities, which violated a previous F.C.C. ruling that Internet links were not to be governed by the same strict regulation as telephone or electric service.
Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE
The proposal, to be introduced by Tom Wheeler, the chairman of the commission, will prohibit broadband companies from blocking any sites or services from consumers.F.C.C. Seeks a New Path on ‘Net Neutrality’ RulesFEB. 19, 2014
Verizon challenged the rules set by the Federal Communications Commission, arguing that the commission had overstepped the authority granted to it by federal telecommunications laws.Bits Blog: The Nuts and Bolts of Network NeutralityJAN. 14, 2014
Tom Wheeler of the F.C.C. said it might appeal.Rebuffing F.C.C. in ‘Net Neutrality’ Case, Court Allows Streaming DealsJAN. 14, 2014
The new rules, according to the people briefed on them, will allow a company like Comcast or Verizon to negotiate separately with each content company – like Netflix, Amazon, Disney or Google – and charge different companies different amounts for priority service.
That, of course, could increase costs for content companies, which would then have an incentive to pass on those costs to consumers as part of their subscription prices.
Proponents of net neutrality have feared that such a framework would empower large, wealthy companies and prevent small start-ups, which might otherwise be the next Twitter or Facebook, for example, from gaining any traction in the market.
The F.C.C. plans were first reported online Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal.
The new proposals, drafted by the F.C.C.'s chairman, Tom Wheeler, and his staff, will be circulated to the other four commissioners beginning Thursday, an F.C.C. spokeswoman said. The details can be amended by consensus in order to attract support from a majority of the commissioners. The commission will then vote on a final proposal at its May 15 meeting.
Heres what net neutrality means:
Now for those who don't know what Net Neutrality is and what bad things would happen would be like.....
Here is a video explaining it perfectly
Yeah so. Discuss. I guess. I mean this is a pretty big issue.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
So instead of fixing their regulations, they're just going to let service providers price gouge everyone? I'd say I'm surprised by I'm not. Net neutrality could only go for so long.
LordofHats wrote: So instead of fixing their regulations, they're just going to let service providers price gouge everyone? I'd say I'm surprised by I'm not. Net neutrality could only go for so long.
Well. The thing is that net neutrality should be kept. In fact the primary benefits would be gone. And would stagnant all competition but to a bare few companies.
I have yet to see any good reasons for them to pass it apart from its a Capitalist system. Well, then shouldn't everyone have an equal playing field? I mean it isn't like this is america. Oh wait...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/24 00:08:51
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Queue a million people misunderstanding what Net Neutrality is, followed by a million different corporations explaining what their redefined version of the term is to 'help' elucidate the matter.
daedalus wrote: Queue a million people misunderstanding what Net Neutrality is, followed by a million different corporations explaining what their redefined version of the term is to 'help' elucidate the matter.
These million people are actually quite smart. They brought up excellent points. They all are fairly well organized and have a website and what is actually going on and understand what net neutrality is.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
What's amazing to me is that this hysteria fails to take into account is that the internet has remained perfectly open and free for many years without the implementation of net neutrality, and there is no reason to expect that to change now.
Keep in mind that most ISP providers built the infrastructure on their own.
whembly wrote: What's amazing to me is that this hysteria fails to take into account is that the internet has remained perfectly open and free for many years without the implementation of net neutrality, and there is no reason to expect that to change now.
I don't think anyone legitimately thinks the internet will implode. But the cost of using the internet is going to go up. New business is going to be stifled, but probably not in a way most of us will ever notice. Comcast and the cable companies will happily go on being dicks to everyone while getting richer than ever, and the world keeps turning
whembly wrote: What's amazing to me is that this hysteria fails to take into account is that the internet has remained perfectly open and free for many years without the implementation of net neutrality, and there is no reason to expect that to change now..
1.) It's already starting to change now, with the Netflix payoff, and
2.) it hasn't changed previously at least partially because Comcast is under a voluntary consent decree.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/24 03:37:24
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
whembly wrote: What's amazing to me is that this hysteria fails to take into account is that the internet has remained perfectly open and free for many years without the implementation of net neutrality, and there is no reason to expect that to change now.
Keep in mind that most ISP providers built the infrastructure on their own.
Yes but did they create the infrastructure.(As much as providing a lettuce piece to a cheese burger at mcdonalds) Do you force artists to conform to a style because someone gave you the paint brush and the frame. Do we say what we want them to paint exactly and claim that was your work and no one elses? No. Well thats basically what is happening. The ISPS believe they built everything yes that is correct but they didn't fill it. The internet did that, they lead the charge but they just left it to grow. If it continues to grow it will become better and give more competition. As it stands currently companies have to fight for quality, not quantity. What gets better service? Quality products. What doesn't? Quantity products. Because who wants a hundred hamburgers that are made terribly and taste horrible compared to a great crafted hamburger made out of sirloin steak?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/24 03:41:46
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
whembly wrote: Keep in mind that most ISP providers built the infrastructure on their own.
Sure, except for the billions of dollars of tax breaks. That lost revenue didn't come out of thin air, it came out of taxpayer pockets. The "we built this" line is just as bs in this case as it was in R-Money's.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/24 03:40:57
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
whembly wrote: Keep in mind that most ISP providers built the infrastructure on their own.
Sure, except for the billions of dollars of tax breaks. That lost revenue didn't come out of thin air, it came out of taxpayer pockets. The "we built this" line is just as bs in this case as it was in R-Money's.
whembly wrote: Keep in mind that most ISP providers built the infrastructure on their own.
Sure, except for the billions of dollars of tax breaks. That lost revenue didn't come out of thin air, it came out of taxpayer pockets. The "we built this" line is just as bs in this case as it was in R-Money's.
So basically they see the internet as cable. Because everyone is moving to the internet because its cheaper and the consumers are getting smarter.... Wouldn't everyone find a way to beat the system? You know we make our own cable company and do the same thing and don't offer any problems or money. We just offer broadband and support. We are run by the government and are run by tax payer dollars. All broadband companies would be disbanded and merged into this one company.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
whembly wrote: Keep in mind that most ISP providers built the infrastructure on their own.
Sure, except for the billions of dollars of tax breaks. That lost revenue didn't come out of thin air, it came out of taxpayer pockets. The "we built this" line is just as bs in this case as it was in R-Money's.
And that's different from any other large companies in the US? Should GM start massively discounting their products simply because taxpayers bailed out the company?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/24 03:48:22
The current structure of the cable market is one where the cable companies have no incentive to offer a superior service. Time Warner, Comcast, Verizon, just carve out their own little corners and built regional monopolies for their service.
While I've advocated a government run internet provided before, I don't think such a thing is politically viable right now. Maybe in a few years when people really start getting tired of being gouged but not now.
whembly wrote: Keep in mind that most ISP providers built the infrastructure on their own.
Sure, except for the billions of dollars of tax breaks. That lost revenue didn't come out of thin air, it came out of taxpayer pockets. The "we built this" line is just as bs in this case as it was in R-Money's.
And that's different from any other large companies in the US? Should GM start massively discounting their products simply because taxpayers bailed out the company?
Yes. Because it shows how inadequate of a company they are. That they can mess things up so much that they buggerize everything. If those companies go down all of them because of some nation wide depression, then we will not have the internet in the United States.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LordofHats wrote: The current structure of the cable market is one where the cable companies have no incentive to offer a superior service. Time Warner, Comcast, Verizon, just carve out their own little corners and built regional monopolies for their service.
While I've advocated a government run internet provided before, I don't think such a thing is politically viable right now. Maybe in a few years when people really start getting tired of being gouged but not now.
Hence why I am moving to the EU.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/24 03:51:23
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
whembly wrote: And that's different from any other large companies in the US? Should GM start massively discounting their products simply because taxpayers bailed out the company?
The cable companies wouldn't exist at all without tax payer money. Comparing the money poured into the cable and internet infrastructure of the US over the last four decades to a single bail out of the auto industry is comparing a bowl of rice to the beach.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/24 03:51:51
Asherian Command wrote: We are run by the government and are run by tax payer dollars. All broadband companies would be disbanded and merged into this one company.
Asherian Command wrote: We are run by the government and are run by tax payer dollars. All broadband companies would be disbanded and merged into this one company.
Asherian Command wrote: We are run by the government and are run by tax payer dollars. All broadband companies would be disbanded and merged into this one company.
But that would be socialism!
Yes a economic system that is also apparent in police forces, and all groups that help us to live.
You know its kind of funny, my political science teachers all make fun of conservative looks. I mean every single one of them, I go to a republician college. they laugh when they call socialism evil. And hit them over the head with economics and political agendas. Socialism is as evil as mercantilism or you know a toaster. It helps me but it burns to the touch. So I better not touch and just put my toast in there so I don't burn my hand and have awesome food.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
LordofHats wrote: The current structure of the cable market is one where the cable companies have no incentive to offer a superior service. Time Warner, Comcast, Verizon, just carve out their own little corners and built regional monopolies for their service.
While I've advocated a government run internet provided before, I don't think such a thing is politically viable right now. Maybe in a few years when people really start getting tired of being gouged but not now.
The "NSA scare" doesn't help the situation with government run electronic facilities either.
socialism! 
