(Topic ID: 189364)

FCC Starts Dismantling Internet (Neutrality)


By Wickerman2

1 year ago



Topic Stats

  • 459 posts
  • 92 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 10 months ago by chad
  • Topic is favorited by 4 Pinsiders

You

Topic Gallery

There have been 18 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).

Far-Out-Man (resized).jpg
Net+neutrality+meme+dump_8521b1_6447383 (resized).jpg
7C5CC682-BE91-48EF-BA54-52A75405FDCB (resized).jpeg
829BB22D-EEB9-4E59-A582-9B2D09687799 (resized).jpeg
maxresdefault (resized).jpg
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
2C7C6DC7-EDBE-4DFB-9EF5-5E1F5B09DD16 (resized).jpeg
DNGlrABUIAAr9RO (resized).jpg
what-is-net-neutrality-isp-package-diagram.0 (resized).jpg
pasted_image (resized).png
NN.png
IMG_0136 (resized).PNG
IMG_0621 (resized).JPG (© https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fringewalkers.com%2Fimages%2FOak_Stake_II.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fw)
IMG_1111 (resized).JPG
highwaydeaths (resized).png

There are 459 posts in this topic. You are on page 9 of 10.
#401 1 year ago
Quoted from fattdirk:

No I do not design networks. I'm not sure what that has to do with countering my argument. Lets shift the conversation from network demand to censorship. Do you believe giving ISPs the right to censor information is ok?

censor, block content, throttle content, charge money for other peoples' content, and so on. because that's what repealing Net Neutrality does. i get "networking is hard and expensive" but it's also 100% irrelevant to this conversation. ISPs are big boys. they can handle it without setting up paywalls, slow lanes, and chinese firewalls between customers and internet sites and services.

#402 1 year ago
Quoted from fattdirk:

No I do not design networks. I'm not sure what that has to do with countering my argument. Lets shift the conversation from network demand to censorship. Do you believe giving ISPs the right to censor information is ok?

It matters because what you are arguing about what the product should be... is not reality of how the systems are built... even in a pure non-commercial environment. Networks are built to be oversubscribed because of the usage patterns - that's the technical choice... nothing to do with neutrality, censorship, dr evil, or greed. That's what engineers do when they look at the requirements.

Quoted from fattdirk:

. Lets shift the conversation from network demand to censorship. Do you believe giving ISPs the right to censor information is ok?

No I don't. And nothing I've said would support that. In fact I've said multiple times they should not be allowed to target traffic based on self serving, anti competitive reasons. Just from this thread...

Quoted from flynnibus:

I don't think isps should be able to block traffic for commercial reasons, but there are legit traffic management reasons to block or shape traffic. Also, a network provider should not have to give "free" access to anyone who shows up at their doorstep. They should be able to scale costs with their peers.

Quoted from flynnibus:

Banning fast lanes effectively bans QoS priorization outside of network health justifications. That's bad. What needs to be banned is punishing traffic for self-serving interests... not banning the ability to prioritize.

Quoted from flynnibus:

ISPs shouldn't be able to differentiate between peers based on commercial interests or competitive reasons.. but they should be able to recover from people who need different levels of access.

If you really want to talk about censorship and why the actual implementation and consequences are far more difficult than just talking about a cable company blocking Netflix... you should be talking about if isps should be able to block traffic for legal, or policy reasons.

Should an isp be able to block or refuse service to a neo-nazi site?
What about a site offering porn many may find offensive?
What about a spammer who is operating within the grey area of the law but is a public nuisance?
What about a anarchist site that is publishing?

What about a new technology that is harming people, but the legal framework hasn't caught up yet? Or would you support allowing that operation to continue until someone can get a court to agree to pull the plug?

What about content that maybe legal in one state, but not another?
What about an individual who harasses people online?

When you make something a regulated public utility... you strip their ability to have their own standards of morality and who they want to associate with as a business... making it much harder for isps to control what is allowed to operate on their network.

That sounds like censorship to some... but imagine you are the guy being hurt by another party and the isp just says "nothing we can do". These binary "don't touch my bits!!!" Arguments that don't actually look at all the types of stuff that happens... are just propaganda to rally people. The topics are far more messy than a few memes shared around.

now imagine when people start trying to paint businesses in an ugly light because of the traffic they host... and can't do anything about it. It's like a landlord that finds out he is housing a brothel.... but unless the cops bust them... he can't do anything about it and has to let them stay.

#403 1 year ago
Quoted from pezpunk:

censor, block content, throttle content, charge money for other peoples' content, and so on. because that's what repealing Net Neutrality does. i get "networking is hard and expensive" but it's also 100% irrelevant to this conversation. ISPs are big boys. they can handle it without setting up paywalls, slow lanes, and chinese firewalls between customers and internet sites and services.

You are better than that...

Throwing it all in a bin and just calling it all the same? Weak weak strawman arguments verse the actual subject at hand.

Net neutrality is not a universal definition of something that can be implemented. Well... it can... but it's not actually what people want... they've just been told it is and they don't bother with the details.

The greatest common denominator system sucks.

#404 1 year ago

Just uploaded the battleforthenet.com bumper to my YouTube channel, made it the promoted video on my channel, and added a "suggested" link to this at the beginning of all my videos. Within seconds I started getting views and upvotes on it so hopefully I can help drive a few hundred signatures and calls to Congress before Tuesday.

#405 1 year ago

Looks like it's dead.....

#406 1 year ago

Yup. Definitely dead. Bring on the pay lanes and censored content!!

#407 1 year ago

Whoa. Anyone watching the feed?

The last thing that happened was a woman came rushing to the bench and then Ajit said "On the advice of security, we need to take a break". Then, as everyone was heading for the doors, the feed went to a FCC logo.

#408 1 year ago

Some posts on Twitter are saying there was a bomb threat

Other posts are saying it's just protesters interrupting.

[edit]: Yeah, nobody actually knows yet.

[edit2]: the feed was showing security going around with dogs, so it seems like the issue may actually be a bomb threat.

13
#409 1 year ago

yeah the repeal is not surprising. Ajit Pai spent exactly 0.0 seconds of his life caring what the public wanted. his entire reason for being appointed was to dismantle net neutrality as a gift to Comcast and Verizon, to the detriment of every other business and consumer in the country.

11
#410 1 year ago

What a freaking joke. The FCC chair gets up, makes a fiery speech that says basically what we all think (well, the smart ones), and pai says "so I take you are against it" and everyone starts laughing hysterically.

So sad. All those laughing people laughing their way to the bank on our backs. Paid off by the companies they are now giving all control to. What a messed up country this is.

#411 1 year ago

That irritated the hell out of me too.

I also like Mr. PotatoHead's comment about being "open minded", yet he already had his speech written wanting to repeal.

#412 1 year ago
Quoted from Spyderturbo007:

That irritated the hell out of me too.
I also like Mr. PotatoHead's comment about being "open minded", yet he already had his speech written wanting to repeal.

Open minded to more bribes. What an ass hat.

#413 1 year ago

Well, it was a 3-2 vote to repeal net neutrality. Can't say I'm surprised. Big mistake, IMHO.

#414 1 year ago

hopefully this travesty can be fixed in a few years.

10
#415 1 year ago

This is a sad day for this nation. Nice work at draining the swamp.

#416 1 year ago

Disheartening and terrible. Anybody in favor of this either is uneducated on the matter or they have a financial interest in the repeal. I can't see any other reason why someone would be in favor of the repeal.

#417 1 year ago

horrible, horrible, horrible. I just don't get how none of our voices matter to this congress. democratic, republican, it simply doesn't matter. and there is no need for name calling. the entire congress is responsible for letting this happen to us.

and congress doesn't care, because they will have the fastest internet lanes to everyone, without paying a single cent for the service. so not right.

I cant even imagine what things are going to look like moving forward. sad day America. sad sad day.

#418 1 year ago

Well Mother Fu***R, I was holding out hope the lobbyists had not succeeded, Grrrrrr.

#419 1 year ago

As I understand it, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this decision now has to be run through Congress, and if need be, the Supreme Court. Not that either of those options are at all comforting...

Still. What a disgrace.

#421 1 year ago

phase 1.

#422 1 year ago
Quoted from fxdwg:

I just don't get how none of our voices matter to this congress

Ignored millions of calls against it. Ignored the facts that proved all the "for" calls were bots. Follow the money. This shit happens on all the issues. 96% of public supports a background check on a certain item...nope. Millions are against this current measure, nope. Can't wait to see how this makes the internet "better".

Let the lawsuits begin.

#423 1 year ago

I believe valuable companies such as Netflix will wage a legal war over this before it is over.

#424 1 year ago
Quoted from DCFAN:

I believe valuable companies such as Netflix will wage a legal war over this before it is over.

pasted_image (resized).png
#425 1 year ago

So we can all agree that Mr. Pai is a total worthless schmuck, but I feel very slightly sad for his future. Sure he will have his fat pile of cash which is all he really cares about, but I don't think he realizes that he'll be harassed, threatened and made fun of for years to come.

maxresdefault (resized).jpg

#426 1 year ago
Quoted from mbaumle:

As I understand it, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this decision now has to be run through Congress, and if need be, the Supreme Court. Not that either of those options are at all comforting...
Still. What a disgrace.

Not correct, as far as I know.

Like the FRA (who I am regulated by), there are laws in place, put in years ago, that gives the authority to do the regulating. Those laws in place is like a broad brushstroke for congress to say, 'Make your own regulations, we trust you.' So, they now just publish a regulation change in the Federal Register, and that's it.

With the FRA, at least, they usually post a proposed rule change, and give interested parties a set time to comment - usually 180 days. They then take all the comments, and specifically address them, and makes any changes to the rules that they feel that they agree with, before enacting the regulation. Said regulation usaully has wordings in it saying that 'x' companies have until 'x' date to have this implemented, etc. Here, I don't think that's necessary, since it's undoing something previously done.

#427 1 year ago
Quoted from fxdwg:

horrible, horrible, horrible. I just don't get how none of our voices matter to this congress. democratic, republican, it simply doesn't matter. and there is no need for name calling. the entire congress is responsible for letting this happen to us.

This isn't a "Both sides" issue. All 3 votes to overturn came from the same party and the Chair was appointed by the President. Elections have consequences.

-1
#428 1 year ago

829BB22D-EEB9-4E59-A582-9B2D09687799 (resized).jpeg

#429 1 year ago

This is disappointing; but not surprising. This Corp Arse Hat appointed by President Cheeto has been clear with motives from day one.
I personally wonder how long until Evil Corps start implementing tiered pricing for content.

-1
#430 1 year ago

Bad boys bad boys what you gonna do when the fcc comes for you.

7C5CC682-BE91-48EF-BA54-52A75405FDCB (resized).jpeg

#431 1 year ago
Quoted from Coyote:

Like the FRA (who I am regulated by)

So hows that PTC coming along?

Just you wait and see what happens when you piss off the ENTIRE internet. I am sure the DOXXING will be brutal.

#432 1 year ago

I'd love to see if that mug fits over his head, sideways.

-2
#433 1 year ago

Net+neutrality+meme+dump_8521b1_6447383 (resized).jpg

#434 1 year ago

"nuetrality" from government is double speak

#435 1 year ago

you seriously did not read any of the conversation in this thread. very sad.

-3
#436 1 year ago
Quoted from pezpunk:

you seriously did not read any of the conversation in this thread. very sad.

The world did not end today Pez, it'll be ok trust me!

#437 1 year ago
Quoted from Who-Dey:

The world did not end today Pez, it'll be ok trust me!

No, but people pressing buttons without knowing what they do will probably be what does bring about the end. You seriously have no idea what net neutrality really was, do you? If so, please explain why seeing it go away is a good idea.

-2
#438 1 year ago
Quoted from jar155:

No, but people pressing buttons without knowing what they do will probably be what does bring about the end. You seriously have no idea what net neutrality really was, do you? If so, please explain why seeing it go away is a good idea.

I have my opinions about it. I never said it's a good idea for it to go away either. I am staying "Neutral" on the subject and I'm just gonna be a spectator and sit back and eat my popcorn and watch the thread.

#439 1 year ago

Without NN, expect more of this...

#440 1 year ago

Pai has, by far, the most punchable face in bureaucracy right now and that column is freakin jammed up solid.
He's the smarmiest dickbag I've ever seen.

#443 1 year ago

I love how this has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. Good work!

#444 1 year ago
Quoted from fattdirk:

I love how this has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. Good work!

I have severe adhd.

-1
#445 1 year ago

I cared more when they took out the Monsanto ride at Disneyland than whatever those bureaucrats did today. But even then I really didn't give a shit.

#446 1 year ago
Quoted from Pugsley:

So hows that PTC coming along?

I know this is a troll post, because of the smilie there, but I'll say this:
I am required by my employer to say it's horrible.
But as a train driver AND a signal maintainer, I have mixed feelings - it has its good points and draws, and it has its bad points. I won't go into it more'n that, since it's off-topic.

1 month later
#448 1 year ago

The King is on the right side of history.

There are 51 votes in the Senate and likely enough in the House. They could have a "vote of disapproval" under the Congressional review Act which could nullify Pai's nonsense. The PROBLEM is that the leader of the House and Senate respectively will not bring it to a vote. The support is there, but they are toadies.

Keep calling your reps.

4 weeks later
#449 1 year ago

The Federal Communications Commission has ordered net neutrality to end on April 23, the agency formally announced Thursday in the Federal Register.

The commission voted 3-2 in December to overturn Obama-era rules preventing internet service providers, or ISPs, from treating certain content differently. The change will allow ISPs to block, slow down, or charge more for certain content as they see fit. That means consumers could notice a difference in how they experience sites like Netflix and Facebook, compared with websites of smaller companies.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/22/the-fccs-order-gutting-net-neutrality-is-now-official-but-the-fight-is-just-getting-started/

#450 1 year ago

disgusting the way the FCC is ignoring the will of the people here.

Ajit Pai was nominated for ONE reason. So the big ISPs could eliminate Net Neutrality.

Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
$ 29.99
Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
Lighted Pinball Mods
From: $ 99.99
Cabinet - Other
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 19.95
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
ULEKstore
$ 89.95
Cabinet - Shooter Rods
Super Skill Shot Shop
$ 24.99
Lighting - Led
Lee's Parts
$ 76.95
Cabinet - Shooter Rods
Super Skill Shot Shop
$ 89.99
Lighting - Led
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 69.99
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 29.99
Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 8.95
$ 76.95
Cabinet - Shooter Rods
Super Skill Shot Shop
$ 87.00
$ 18.99
Eproms
Matt's Basement Arcade
$ 69.99
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 99.99
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
Lighted Pinball Mods
$ 15.00
Cabinet - Decals
ModFather Pinball Mods
$ 115.00
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
ModFather Pinball Mods
$ 22.00
Playfield - Other
Pin Monk
$ 46.99
Lighting - Interactive
Lee's Parts
$ 25.00
$ 29.99
Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
Lighted Pinball Mods
From: $ 9.99
From: $ 42.00
Cabinet - Shooter Rods
ModFather Pinball Mods
$ 15.00
Cabinet - Decals
ModFather Pinball Mods
There are 459 posts in this topic. You are on page 9 of 10.

Hey there! Got a moment?

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside