This is bad news

https://www.gofccyourself.com

Don't really care aboot this kind of thing and rarely does it end up as bad as the chicken little's that run around

WHOA WHOA WHOA THIS MUST BE STOPPED!

Essentially, it would be a significant rule change for the informational highway.

Like with highways right now, cars, trucks, tractor trailers, busses, etc all share highways equally. They can hop on and drive on it at any time, use any lane, and everybody is expected to obey traffic laws and speed limits.

Imagine if highways were changed so that the fast and middle lanes were reserved only for commercial traffic (tractor trailers, busses, etc), and all non-commercial and commuter traffic was required to be in the slow lane. Traffic would become a nightmare.

Not a perfect analogy, but that's basically what could happen.

It's kind of fitting that I'm mentioning this city, but have you seen the D.C. Beltway? There are existing lanes that are reserved for people that want to pay for the 'fast lane' . There are other things like HOV lanes and stuff that, overall, harm traffic more than hurt it (though I'm well aware why those things exist).

I completely get your analogy though. The cable companies have been looking for *anything* to halt cord cutting. While this overturn won't hurt companies like Netflix and Hulu (they can afford to pay for more bandwidth ... and they should), it is going to kill things like torrents and other sites that provide video that cable companies hate.

I wonder how YouTube is going to fare in this situation? If anything, I'm sure Google will be well motivated to roll out their Google Fiber project at a bit faster rate.

I travel the beltway daily. To clarify, the fast lane (actually called ho/t lanes or express lanes) are still hov accessible (no toll) with a specially equipped transponder and a vehicle with 3 people in it (hov-3). It does allow people to pay a toll to circumvent the 3 person hov-3 requirement as you referenced.

This means nothing to me. They're gonna do what they're gonna do. I don't care.

I remember a time when there was no internet and we got by just fine.

You sure get yourself worked up over things you can't control, don't you?

You're in Colorado, weed's legal now. Why not give it a try?

Especially now that weed is becoming legal everywhere That's what I call progress!

The government can't halt my cord cutting. I mostly watch CEDs and VHSs with the occasional DVD and Bluray. I use the internet mainly for pinside and CL.

I hate the way it's going with net neutrality but this started a few years back and it was only a matter of time before they got it done.

It reminds me when they converted broadcast TV from analog to digital. It didn't matter much to the people in the city but it essentially locked free TV to rural people unless they wanted to upgrade their antenna and TV.

What happened a few years back is that they put in protections to /keep/ net neutrality. What they did today was begin the process of repealing those protections.

Throttling, bandwidth caps, preferred access, it should all be illegal. Try creating a startup Youtube now when youtube content does not count toward your wireless data quota or it runs on ATT at fullspeed because Google can afford to pay for that to happen, but a startup cannot.

ISPs should be dumb pipes like water, and ran like a utility. Want to raise rates? Gotta go to court and explain why.

Email your reps ASAP

I use the internet to pass the time at work, and most of what's on there is just rehash garbage anyway, which is why I don't give a shit what they do.

I'm sure at least some of us have better things to do than stare at a stupid computer in our free time.

Guys, here's a really easy to read, lighthearted take on net neutrality written by a well known internet comic artist. It is also well cited. Rolling back net neutrality is a big issue.

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality

The internet is not just a way to waste your free time, though it is good for that. Millions of people depend on it for their livelihoods. It's nice that you're not one of them, but surely you understand the importance it plays in many, many businesses as well.

That I do. When it goes down at work, it means I can't do the newer emissions test until it's back up. But it's not my doing or problem. It is unfortunate the world has come to that where even in a retail store they can no longer make a sale if the electricity goes out.

But again for the limited internet use I have, whatever they are planning won't have much if any effect on me. So I am free to not care aren't I? Other people can worry about whatever they choose, but I choose not to.

I was reading the arguments for and against and it seems both sides believe the internet was successful because internet data was/never was neutral.

I think Google is correct in thinking that different types of data should be regulated. HD video puts a massive burden on networks.

If people are worried that Youtube will be taken away by this, I'd be more worried that Google will decide to shut it down eventually. It costs a lot of money to host all that data with not much in return.

Shouldn't this topic be in the basement. Nothing to do with pinball. This is a political discussion.

I worry more about copyright law and public domain.

Last I checked the internet isn't free.

When he doesn't get paid he will

Seems like anytime Government gets involved, things get big time jacked up, delayed, more expensive and more complex.

No, actually HD doesn't burden the networks. Telcos want you believe that it does, but it does not. There's a one-time investment in fiber (which they've mostly already laid -- go look up "dark fiber" if you want to know more), and minor ongoing costs for maintenance and power.

What this is about, is greed. Telcos want to be able to charge extra for something you already get with your ordinary cable/fiber/wireless/DSL fees.

These are the same companies that used to charge $10 a month to rent a rotary dial phone, $1 to send a single email, $1 per SMS -- now these or better are provided essentially free for most of us because of a free-ish market.

Or hey, you can just do nothing and later pay $75 extra per month to access Pinside at the speed you're getting right now, with the "premium speed" upgrade. P.S. Pinside won't pay. YOU will pay. And all of the people that can't pay will make our forum and many like them wither to a fraction of their former selves.

th (resized).jpg

no this is 100% the result of the current administration's agenda and appointments. it's hard getting through to any politicians about net neutrality, but Obama was clearly for it and Trump is clearly against it -- that's not a political opinion, that's fact.

(also i agree this should be a topic for the basement)

that's what opponents of net neutrality want you to think, but really all net neutrality does is stop ISPs from abusing the backbone of the internet -- keeping it open and free from bias and restriction. it takes some serious mental gymnastics (usually peppered with a lack of knowledge of what's at stake) to be opposed to the concept of net neutrality.

Fixed that for you.

as a government contractor myself i resent that remark! yeah we aint cheap, but who would you rather have writing your software -- us or government employees?

Sooooo who's gonna make all the big money off of this. There's ALWAYS big money involved in shit like this.

I've never seen anyone online that was even indifferent on net neutrality, until I read this thread (unless you are a telecom executive of course). I'm not trying to talk down to anyone, but honestly, you are doing yourselves a disservice by not educating yourself on the issues. You are also selling yourself short on your power and rights as a citizen.

I work in Government now and worked for government as a contractor for years. I've even worked the exact same position as a contractor as I did in a government capacity. Guess which one was more efficient, more streamlined and cost effective? The contractor was. The contractor has no choice but to be cheaper and better if they want to win the contract and continue to work it. The Gov has no competition, contractors have a lot of competition. So speaking from experience from both aspects I believe you are incorrect on your "Fix" statement.

-pezpunk and anybody else, if you are going to thumbs down me for the above statement, please elaborate. Otherwise I think you are of the belief that our government is the most streamlined and cost effective organization out there.

pezpunk having provided contracted software development services to city, county, state and federal governments, I can say with confidence that the government has no business writing software, but that's not what I was talking about. I stand by my prior remarks. There is an enormous amount of corruption at the contractor level. I've seen it first hand.

Streamlined and cost effective is not what I want in infrastructure. I want solid and built to last for a long, long time. Going cheap is rarely the best option with infrastructure. Certain things should be undertaken without a profit motive: health care, public safety (police and fire), education, bridges/airports/roads/communications, utilities, the postal service, etc etc etc.

iPhones, electric cars, spacecraft, pinball machines, luxuries, these are far, far better done with enterprise. No argument there.

But this argument has nothing whatsoever to do with net neutrality.

Telcos want to prioritize their services over others so that you watch/pay for theirs, which makes them more money. It's quite simple. Want to pay more for Internet and have a substantially less diverse and interesting Internet? Do nothing.

As a postal employee I completely agree with you Brijam.

I am glad that someone started this thread. I thought about it, but wasn't sure if it fell with in the posting guidelines. I think that this is very topical to a website that is based on such a niche audience. Abandoning the protections provided by net neutrality will put websites like Pinside at risk. If Pinside has to start paying for bandwith where is the revenue going to come from? The internet works well as it stands. Its not like its some failing industry that drastically needs to be "de regulated". Really what it is doing is opening he door for isps to add regulations to the rest of those on the web and make a profit on it. They are ignoring the wants of the consumer with this one. I really struggle to find a reason why this makes sense outside of generating more revenue for current isps.

Most of us have access to the Internet in more than one way. In addition to calling my local rep, I was thinking about dropping my land based isp for the next 3 months out of protest and referencing this issue. I figure that it will force me to do better things over the summer like play more pinball.

That's easy to say but different people have vastly different opinions there.

When my Dad was looking for his first job in the late 70s, there was no health care, Social Security was looked down upon as a welfare, and education/training was something you or your employer paid for.

About seven years ago I started a new job at Terminix at the same time as a guy in his early 20s with a wife and a kid. He blew my mind when he told me he thought the government should pay for his education, his cable, and his internet. He thought it was a right to every person. He quit after a week.

The internet has worked great without regulation. I'd say let the companies that provide it, change it and we as consumers will decide if it's for the better.

The other issue especially regarding things like netflix. Say comcast decides that they want to promote their own video site. They may then throttle netflix and hulu etc, so that they don't work as well to make their own that much more attractive. But a company wouldn't try to stifle competition would they??
Where i live, i only have 2 options Wireless dsl and satellite. And i'm not that rural. Problem is Cable doesn't come down my road, and the telephone company doesn't have good lines here either, and there aren't enough houses on this section of road to make it worth their while to upgrade. When i still had dial up, the phone company would only guarantee me 28.8k.

Employer healthcare has been around since ww2. It was a way for companies to try to get you to work for them, over another because the wages were all set equally for the war effort. And let consumers decide only works if there is competition that you can switch to. Unfortunately, in a lot of areas, there really is no competition.

The underlying problem is that the communication lines are owned by private entities. Like Comcast or AT&T owning the roads. If you want to use the road you have to pay them. You want to use the highway, fork over some more cash. You want to use the road on a weekend or during rush hour? That will cost you extra.
If the lines would be public domain they couldn't play those games. Where I live we have Comcast and AT&T which both suck and Hughs Net which is expensive and unreliable.
Instead of blowing trillions on bailouts for Wall Street, failing companies, wars, cash for clunkers and other nonsense "we" should have fixed our (data)infrastructure. Then we would have something to show for other than more debt. With the current administration things look to get worse rather than better. Just my $0.02.

The internet has worked great without regulation. The net neutrality rules are meant to prevent regulation of the internet by isps. The isps are only a means to the Internet. The content contributions to the internet by the isps suck, that is why they need this boost. If something like Google fiber was everywhere, the current isp business model would be obsolete and other businesses would benefit from larger data sharing capabilities. "Regulation" is just another way of thinking about the control of power. Someone is always being "regulated". The public votes on rules to regulate the government. This is an example of the government allowing a semi monopoly to regulate people and other forms of industry. Another thing to consider is that the internet has now become one the largest vehicles for free speech. The impact that the internet has had on global politics in the past 10 years has been immense. The power of the internet has changed practically overnight. Condensing that power to the isp giants might have unforseen consequences for everyone.