F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules... Thanks Trump.

[ChainFlow]

You noted that "ISPs operate regional monopolies" with no qualification. I think the [disingenuous] point you were trying (and failing) to make was obvious.

In any case the claim is incorrect, your lying notwithstanding. The situation I'm in is hardly rare.

How do you reconcile the fact that over 90% of census blocks have access to at least 2 service providers (not even including satellite) with the clear lie you penned in your other posting?

Again - could it be that you're lying and misrepresenting to suit your (laughable) views?

https://arstechnica.com/information...-choice-for-many-especially-at-higher-speeds/

At the FCC's 25Mbps download/3Mbps upload broadband standard, there are no ISPs at all in 30 percent of developed census blocks and only one offering service that fast in 48 percent of the blocks. About 55 percent of census blocks have no 100Mbps/10Mbps providers, and only about 10 percent have multiple options at that speed.

At the 10Mbps/1Mbps threshold—which captures slower DSL technology in addition to cable and fiber—about 90 percent of census blocks have at least two providers. These numbers exclude satellite, which is available nearly everywhere but has high latency and often low data caps.

Even these numbers overstate the amount of competition, because an ISP might offer service to only part of a census block. The percentage of householdswith choice is thus even lower.

You’re using faulty data, and counting shitty 5Mbps DSL that’s in your 90% count. If you only look at broadband, 78% of census blocks have 0-1 provider as of 2016. And again, it’s probably less than that because census blocks are not accurate.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

Probably the same reason your ideas didn't work with cable television and other telecommunications.

admittingly I asked that question before finding out more about how the lines are laid, etc....

And I was mainly only referring to the large metro areas that have multiple providers, as clearly it won't matter if you have only one, or they divvy up the regions like they're gerrymandering service and shit

 

[Rod1]

You didn't explain anything and now you're trying to retell the narrative to make yourself feel better after someone else explained it better and surprise! I listened. You were a fucking dick and acted exactly like the other side does with that dumbass Trump comment which lumps you in the same category as them as far as I'm concerned. Wipe the egg off your face and get over it.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Data is not comparable to water. This is one of the most pernicious lies fronted by the ISP industry. When some bits travel down the line, they don’t cost anything more than when the line is doing nothing - unless the line is at capacity. The actual limited resource is bandwidth. Which you already pay more for more of.

If I use 500TB of data but I do it all when the line is not at capacity like off-peak hours, I’ve cost the ISP practically nothing.

no, im not comparing them as equal entities per unit. I am saying if you are going to treat both as necessity utilities, where do you draw the limit between providing a necessity and a luxury?

and the it doesnt cost them much on the last mile, but they do have to add in back end switches on the 2nd tier to accommodate for extra traffic and requests.

 

[chrisdiaz]

their servers? No its their routers they allow you to use. Your home router is given an IP to communate to their router that routes the traffic to the IP of google or whateven website your visting. There has to be an end device forwarding you to the "free internet" and vice versa. If you wanted to become ISP, you would have to purchase a set of external IP's and you would still be routing through their infrastructure. If there arent multiple routers for you to utilize, that the telecom companies provide which makes up the backbone of the internet, your not going to get a reply from the website your trying to visit.

Anyone that would like a first hand example of this, open a command prompt and type tracert 8.8.8.8 and you can see how your internet traffic is routed and how many routers (many of which are ISP's) it goes through before you get a response.

 

[ChainFlow]

No, you do pay for monthly services regardless of usages; delivery service. You also pay for quality of service via taxation.

But, yes, you cant compare 100% as they are not carbon copy -- but if you are going to make the argument that data is a necessity, if ISP offers a 5mbps at 25 gigs -- for 24 dollars, that would be seen a basic needs met. Anything above that could be seen as luxury.

But why do you keep including a data cap in this hypothetical? All it does it prevent the customer from doing video streaming or downloading games, and it costs the ISP nothing to not have a cap. Caps are purely rent-seeking behavior because they’re terrible at their ostensible job (managing usage). Because again, off-peak usage doesn’t cost them anything.

 

[Breakitdown]

https://arstechnica.com/information...-choice-for-many-especially-at-higher-speeds/



You’re using faulty data, and counting shitty 5Mbps DSL that’s in your 90% count. If you only look at broadband, 78% of census blocks have 0-1 provider as of 2016. And again, it’s probably less than that because census blocks are not accurate.

Very interesting way of proving a point. I must say I've never seen the technique of "verify the voracity of the claim - deny the claim" be used in such a ham handed way.

So I guess 10mb/s connectivity isn't internet access in your world then? I feel like we're operating with different definitions. In my world (the literal real world) 10mb/s connectivity provides access to internet material. In your world it doesn't. I think it goes without saying that your argument shouldn't hinge on regional monopolies as you yourself have proven that to be patently FALSE, rather you should appeal to emotion with "there are not enough ISPs in my area that provide the connection speed I prefer."

In any case, I think we've gotten to the crux of your appeal - emotion. Suffice it to say we can throw such logic out cleanly. No room for emotional arguments in these type of discussions.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

Anyone that would like a first hand example of this, open a command prompt and type tracert 8.8.8.8 and you can see how your internet traffic is routed and how many routers (many of which are ISP's) it goes through before you get a response.

now you're just getting crazy haha
i'm willing to bet the vast majority of windows users don't even know what command prompt/DOS is....

step that dir/p game up I say

 

[ChainFlow]

no, im not comparing them as equal entities per unit. I am saying if you are going to treat both as necessity utilities, where do you draw the limit between providing a necessity and a luxury?

and the it doesnt cost them much on the last mile, but they do have to add in back end switches on the 2nd tier to accommodate for extra traffic and requests.

Why would they need more back end equipment if it’s being used when the lines aren’t at capacity?

Electricity necessity vs luxury is not something we debate much anymore, even though having lights on at 3AM is kinda a luxury by last-century standards. No one argues that we should put caps on KWh for peasants or whatever it is you’re trying to get at.

Broadband IS a utility in all but name anymore; I’d say that Gb fiber is a luxury. Video is part of modern life and that will just become more and more so the case as the years go on. It’s reasonable to argue that speeds 50x faster than you need for video streaming is a luxury of course.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

But why do you keep including a data cap in this hypothetical? All it does it prevent the customer from doing video streaming or downloading games, and it costs the ISP nothing to not have a cap. Caps are purely rent-seeking behavior because they’re terrible at their ostensible job (managing usage). Because again, off-peak usage doesn’t cost them anything.

They have to accommodate the back end hardware to keep up with increased flow -- its not all last mile network.

And i am talking about data a necessity - basic usage to survive in 2017 america is not beyond emails and online form applications. So once they offer basic packages to meet the necessary demands of all people. Why shouldnt they be able to charge whatever they want for the luxury aspects? Are you saying video streaming, file sharing and game hosting are must have entities to survive?

 

[chrisdiaz]

now you're just getting crazy haha
i'm willing to bet the vast majority of windows users don't even know what command prompt/DOS is....

step that dir/p game up I say

I just think its a good visual tool to get a small grasp on how the internet works. I think if everyone saw this before the vote, they may have a different understanding of what kind of impact this decision can have on us as consumers.

 

[MilesAbove]

No, you do pay for monthly services regardless of usages; delivery service. You also pay for quality of service via taxation.

But, yes, you cant compare 100% as they are not carbon copy -- but if you are going to make the argument that data is a necessity, if ISP offers a 5mbps at 25 gigs -- for 24 dollars, that would be seen a basic needs met. Anything above that could be seen as luxury.

Yes, and this only applies under the oversight of the utility as such; meaning that obstruction or pay-barriers cannot be applied at the will of the provider. Prices are controlled to insure demographics are not given favoritism, and the functions of society are not deterred in advancement based on payment capability.

What you have with the internet is access to information (whether written, streamed, or audio) as well as ability to compete in the market place. Access to information in all abilities to remain competitive all fields is important for a society that doesn't provide an uneven playing field for those with more capital.

How are you to distinguish between informational streaming vs written? Charging the providers for the ability to provide the service, then raising the cost to the consumer, resulting in the same outcome.

What are lower-class and lower-middle class do to obtain information? They are already choosing between healthcare and ability to obtain information to remain competitive. Prices must remain lowered and competitive. People are already paying for the machines, the access, and now sitting under data caps. This simply allows ISPs to keep the populous under ransom for ability to engage in society that is nearly a completely digital society.... with no idea how they will parse necessary vs non-necessary information and access. And since the government cannot protect those access points and amount, we are left to non-ethical and unaccountable corporations to decide.

 

[deviake]

=/=

Read the damn thread before spouting your handpicked talking points. Obama, as is custom, appointed the recommendation of the senate minority leader, McConnell. McConnell picked him. Obama put him in as a minority member where he couldn’t do any damage.

I apologize for the harsh tone earlier, then.

Obama could theoretically have withheld his nomination from the minority leader’s chosen appointee, but that would be breaking with custom and to very little benefit. Note that all 3 Republican commissioners voted for this - it probably didn’t matter that Pai specifically was in charge, except that he’s egregiously dishonest and aggressive in his attempts to service the ISPs.

kl;asjdfkl;asdjf Trumptard!!11!

Making liberals look so good, nice job.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

times like this one really wishes that corporations or churches or whatever couldn't contribute to campaigns as free speech.....

If our system was truly individual donation based and had a legit hard cap...I have a feeling things like this wouldn't be happening.

Assuming massive off the books payments wouldn't then take the place of campaign contributions

 

[ChainFlow]

Very interesting way of proving a point. I must say I've never seen the technique of "verify the voracity of the claim - deny the claim" be used in such a ham handed way.

So I guess 10mb/s connectivity isn't internet access in your world then? I feel like we're operating with different definitions. In my world (the literal real world) 10mb/s connectivity provides access to internet material. In your world it doesn't. I think it goes without saying that your argument shouldn't hinge on regional monopolies as you yourself have proven that to be patently FALSE, rather you should appeal to emotion with "there are not enough ISPs in my area that provide the connection speed I prefer."

In any case, I think we've gotten to the crux of your appeal - emotion. Suffice it to say we can throw such logic out cleanly. No room for emotional arguments in these type of discussions.

Continuing with your dishonest behavior and crude attempts at ad Homs, eh?

10Mbps (really, less than that) is not a competitor to broadband because it can’t be used for the same things that broadband is. A bicycle is not a competitor to a car because even though it can be used for some of the same things, it is not a like-for-like replacement.

Your claim was debunked because you claimed that 90% of markets had competition, and DSL is not a competitor to broadband. I am getting tired of educating you on this topic, you really should do your own research instead of making people spoon-feed you.

Your emotional leaps to grasp at anything that you feel can sustain your monopoly-worshiping position do not serve your image well.

 

[floivanus]

a question I have about this...

if companies then choose to throttle their speeds, or charge more for certain services or whatever....

why wouldn't competition still apply? would not the company that doesn't resort to those things intice more customers?

you know, like the cell phone market and the unlimited plans? Verizon doesn't have the total dominance it used to.....
edit: I realize that if you live in a rural locale (as I do) that you could be screwed either way due to lack of competition already

All it would take is one mobile phone company to come out and allow an unlimited hotspot option on your plan, then your typical ISPs are in trouble.
I wish my home internet was as reliable and dependable as my mobile carrier

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Why would they need more back end equipment if it’s being used when the lines aren’t at capacity?

Electricity necessity vs luxury is not something we debate much anymore, even though having lights on at 3AM is kinda a luxury by last-century standards. No one argues that we should put caps on KWh for peasants or whatever it is you’re trying to get at.

Broadband IS a utility in all but name anymore; I’d say that Gb fiber is a luxury. Video is part of modern life and that will just become more and more so the case as the years go on. It’s reasonable to argue that speeds 50x faster than you need for video streaming is a luxury of course.

because it goes beyond delivery - back end includes provisioning, mediation, billing, account management etc -- all of which comes with very costly software and hardware that becomes more complex and costly as it grows. most ISP billing software charges 4% of revenue with a end point cap at 100'000 users -- after that you have to drastically go to up to accommodate scale.

And, because video service is common, does not mean its not a luxury. If you stopped gaming, watching netflix, youtube you could easily manage life. If you couldnt email or fill out government forms online, that would impact you way more so.

 

[xcvbn]

He also apparently doesn't know that Obama was required to appoint a Republican to the committee. Just dumb.

If McConnel brought him Adolf Hitler, would he have appointed him? Literally all Obama's people had to do was read Pai's LinkedIn to see he was a Verizon shill.

I don't blame Obama, he did a good job acknowledging NN as an issue, but he certainly fucked up here by not making this appointment a bigger issue.

 

[Rod1]

kl;asjdfkl;asdjf Trumptard!!11!

Making liberals look so good, nice job.

I didnt called you a Trumptard until after you refused to even address the point i made.

You simply ignored what i told you, after jumping in the middle of a thread without even reading the thread.

I did explained it before in detail

Also

Only three commissioners can be of the same political party at any given time

https://www.fcc.gov/about-fcc/what-we-do

Obama had to nominate a republican so he asked the republican senate minority leader for a pick.

But apparently im the asshole because despite telling you in the first reply that no more than 3 commissioners can belong to a political party you still decide to plug your ears and say "Thanks Obama" after jumping in the middle of a thread where this very issue was explained in detail.

Im sorry that you are too proud to accept that you were wrong and now claim that i wasnt detailed enough for you, who walked in the middle of the thread. arent you a soccer mom by any chance?

 

[HunterSdVa29]

All it would take is one mobile phone company to come out and allow an unlimited hotspot option on your plan, then your typical ISPs are in trouble.
I wish my home internet was as reliable and dependable as my mobile carrier

too bad phone companies own some of the largest cable/ISPs already, and even when they don't they are constantly trying to merge

I mean the Justice Dept just had to sue to stop TWC from merging w/ AT&T