Author Topic: Net Neutrality 2.0  (Read 2795 times)

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Net Neutrality 2.0
« Reply #50 on: December 15, 2017, 12:32:06 AM »
Think of it like the 2nd amendment for the internet.
Still trying to address a problem that doesn’t exist. The NN rules were a few guys, working in secret, suddenly launching regulations to control the internet for fear that dystopian reality of 2015 internet would never end. I’m more comfortable with private control if the internet than government control. Trump running the internet and deciding what’s “fair” sounds dangerous and, frankly, stupid. The internet of 2017 is pretty much the same as 2015, no noticeable improvement.  Why does the government need to control it?

Does anyone else catch that disconnect around the only way to be free is through government control? Orwellian as hell ain’t it?  :o

When the Obama Admin first started talking up the NN stuff, Glen Beck and others were having a field day pulling up sound bites of various prominent Democratics talking about how they could use NN to help regulate political speech on the internet, and this was back in 2009/2010. And then once more, after the event of Donald Trump being elected, what were the Democrats suddenly talking about? Ways to regulate speech on the Internet.

Net Neutrality is a big deal for Democrats for two reasons: 1) It's their new "Equal Time" project. 2) Silicon Valley, in particular Web-site based tech companies, are major donors to the Democrats in ways that they aren't for Republicans.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Net Neutrality 2.0
« Reply #51 on: December 15, 2017, 12:38:35 AM »
5G is going to be a game changer for ISP potential. 10Gb speed over wireless, not requiring the $1000 considered typical to lay fiber.

Part of the US challenge is the sheer distances involved that have to get plumbed, I would imagine. I also suspect that the costs we see directly are charged indirectly in the UK.

I can't research these suspicions because my internet is too slow in my impoverished nation.

US Prices are functions of distances involved and population densities, or lack thereof. Most of Europe enjoys sufficient population density over enough area that connecting any two points is going to run you over/across a lot of countryside with enough sufficient nearby population to make such a deployment profitable. Not so much in the United States, particularly once west of the Mississippi. East of it, the problems are largely bureaucratic or political in nature.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Net Neutrality 2.0
« Reply #52 on: December 15, 2017, 08:38:52 AM »
Think of it like the 2nd amendment for the internet.
Still trying to address a problem that doesn’t exist. The NN rules were a few guys, working in secret, suddenly launching regulations to control the internet for fear that dystopian reality of 2015 internet would never end. I’m more comfortable with private control if the internet than government control. Trump running the internet and deciding what’s “fair” sounds dangerous and, frankly, stupid. The internet of 2017 is pretty much the same as 2015, no noticeable improvement.  Why does the government need to control it?

Does anyone else catch that disconnect around the only way to be free is through government control? Orwellian as hell ain’t it?  :o

When the Obama Admin first started talking up the NN stuff, Glen Beck and others were having a field day pulling up sound bites of various prominent Democratics talking about how they could use NN to help regulate political speech on the internet, and this was back in 2009/2010. And then once more, after the event of Donald Trump being elected, what were the Democrats suddenly talking about? Ways to regulate speech on the Internet.

Net Neutrality is a big deal for Democrats for two reasons: 1) It's their new "Equal Time" project. 2) Silicon Valley, in particular Web-site based tech companies, are major donors to the Democrats in ways that they aren't for Republicans.

Well, I guess that answers my question about the problem being solved. It’s a bit conspiracy theory-ish but it fits.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Net Neutrality 2.0
« Reply #53 on: December 15, 2017, 09:51:22 AM »
Think of it like the 2nd amendment for the internet.
Still trying to address a problem that doesn’t exist. The NN rules were a few guys, working in secret, suddenly launching regulations to control the internet for fear that dystopian reality of 2015 internet would never end. I’m more comfortable with private control if the internet than government control. Trump running the internet and deciding what’s “fair” sounds dangerous and, frankly, stupid. The internet of 2017 is pretty much the same as 2015, no noticeable improvement.  Why does the government need to control it?

Does anyone else catch that disconnect around the only way to be free is through government control? Orwellian as hell ain’t it?  :o

When the Obama Admin first started talking up the NN stuff, Glen Beck and others were having a field day pulling up sound bites of various prominent Democratics talking about how they could use NN to help regulate political speech on the internet, and this was back in 2009/2010. And then once more, after the event of Donald Trump being elected, what were the Democrats suddenly talking about? Ways to regulate speech on the Internet.

Net Neutrality is a big deal for Democrats for two reasons: 1) It's their new "Equal Time" project. 2) Silicon Valley, in particular Web-site based tech companies, are major donors to the Democrats in ways that they aren't for Republicans.

Well, I guess that answers my question about the problem being solved. It’s a bit conspiracy theory-ish but it fits.

Doubly so when you also recall that Obama's Campaign Success, in particular against Hillary in the primaries, was largely attributed to his campaign's effective use of the internet.

And which political party in particular also tends to be the most vocal about placing restraints on campaign activities? (From "unapproved sources" at least)

While it skirts on the edge of tin-foil hat territory, I don't find "the buy in" on the idea that setting up a strong framework, and precedent, for the Government to become deeply involved in the hows and why's of regulating communications over the internet wasn't step 1 of a broader agenda that just saw a setback from this.

But Google, Netflix, Amazon, et al are opposed to this rollback because it has significant potential to hurt their existing business models and their bottom line. So that one isn't a "grand consipiracy" but rather a simple follow the money game.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Net Neutrality 2.0
« Reply #54 on: December 15, 2017, 12:27:48 PM »
A little satire, funny.

Quote
I and my fellow internet warriors tried everything. We tried tweeting out warnings, calling people who didn’t care or wanted Net Neutrality gone “stupid” and “ignorant,” and on Reddit we even photoshopped FCC Chairman Ajit Pai into a gay pornographic scenario where all the phalluses had the names of internet service provider companies written on them. But nothing worked, not even the gay porn thing.

Quote
I’m not sure how much time passed by. Was it five minutes? Ten? I’m not sure. Time kind of slows when you’re waiting for the apocalypse to rain its Republican driven fury upon you. But it was then that I remembered that I worked from home. My apartment complex would be relatively empty during work hours. The devastation happening in the city would no doubt take longer to reach me.

For now, I was safe. I rose up off the floor, a determination rising with me. The determination to live. I had seen Home Alone enough times to prepare home defenses. My ornaments now lay shattered below the window sills, and my clothing iron is now hung in preparation to fall on someone’s head should they pull on a string for no reason.

I only have six bottles of purified water left. The tap miraculously still works, but I can’t drink that. That’s gross. I’ll have to Bear Grylls it soon.

More at the link, LOL.  ;D