Jump to content

FCC Adopts Net Neutrality Rules


Zulu

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Guess a little of our yelling did the trick. We won! And today the FCC also allowed two city municipal networks to proceed that had been hobbled by outside purchased regulations put in place to prevent competition. More wins for local governance no longer "regulated" by lobbied state legislators.

 

What part of the Title II regulations do you consider outdated specifically? We follow constitutional rules that are a bit older from the 1770s. I'm happy today as I've been very active in this from the beginning. Now to the campaign to blow Comcast's expected lawsuits out before they get lit. And stop the merger. The year is shaping up early!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Name just one thing the government "regulates" that is not a disaster.

 

Enuf said.

What ever I bring up, you will nitpick is and define "disaster" to make your point. Lots of our daily life is regulated, your water supply, how financial transactions are handled, who owns what, how roads and bridges are built, air traffic, who can drive, etc. It is part of life. From history and some other countries experience, some things need to be regulated or there is chaos or the majority live in filth and fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of our daily life is regulated, your water supply, how financial transactions are handled, who owns what, how roads and bridges are built, air traffic, who can drive, etc. It is part of life. From history and some other countries experience, some things need to be regulated or there is chaos or the majority live in filth and fear.

The issue is that we all want regulations to suit our desires and which ignore those of anyone who thinks differently. I sometimes think that some folks believe that anarchy would be better, but history shows that isn't utopia either. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I'm wondering if those who are against Net Neutrality would rather see the big Internet providers (Comcast, Verizon, et.al.) have tiers where the rich are able to access any site they want and can pay for fast speeds whereas the rest of us are limited to where we can surf and are relegated to slow speeds? Not me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of people are for Net Neutrality but are unhappy with what we got. With the politicians on both sides fighting for control what the people needed was thrown under the bus.

 

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/fcc-votes-net-neutrality-big-win

 

 

So congratulations, Team Internet. We put the FCC on the right path at last. Reclassification under Title II was a necessary step in order to give the FCC the authority it needed to enact net neutrality rules. But now we face the really hard part: making sure the FCC doesn’t abuse its authority.

For example, the new rules include a “general conduct rule” that will let the FCC take action against ISP practices that don’t count as blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization. As we said last week and last year, vague rules are a problem. The FCC wants to be, in Chairman Wheeler’s words, “a referee on the field” who can stop any ISP action that it thinks “hurts consumers, competition, or innovation.” The problem with a rule this vague is that neither ISPs nor Internet users can know in advance what kinds of practices will run afoul of the rule. Only companies with significant legal staff and expertise may be able to use the rule effectively. And a vague rule gives the FCC an awful lot of discretion, potentially giving an unfair advantage to parties with insider influence. That means our work is not yet done. We must stay vigilant, and call out FCC overreach.
The actual order is over 300 pages long, and it’s not widely available yet. Details matter. Watch this space for further analysis when the FCC releases the final order.

 

I'm hoping we are going to get the relief from abusive ISPs as promised and not suffer from government imposed restrictions that are worse than the abuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't need no stinkin regulations. We all know that corporations always have our best interest in mind. I can name hundreds of examples like the asbestos industry, Enron, the tobacco industry, gasoline industry (lead), and so on. No, we should let them demonstrate there concern for the public by dumping PCBs, allowing minng run off not our streams, introduce dubious products into our food chain and so on.

Seriously, every time the government introduces a regulation does not mean they are taking your rights away. Too much regulation is a bad thing but too little can be even worse. It's finding that balance is what we really want.

This particular regulation is something I see as good for the public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any ham radio operators want to chime in on letting the airwaves go unregulated? The reason cell phones work is because the frequencies and bands they operate on are regulated.

Careful RV. Having had to live with narrow banding for our emergency responders these past few years I can tell you its definitely not all roses and chocolates. Narrow banding just plain does not work well with elevation intensive terrain (nooks, crannies, gullies and rolling hills). Biggest boon for cell phones was switching from analog to digital allowing far greater mux capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't need no stinkin regulations. We all know that corporations always have our best interest in mind. I can name hundreds of examples like the asbestos industry, Enron, the tobacco industry, gasoline industry (lead), and so on. No, we should let them demonstrate there concern for the public by dumping PCBs, allowing minng run off not our streams, introduce dubious products into our food chain and so on.

Seriously, every time the government introduces a regulation does not mean they are taking your rights away. Too much regulation is a bad thing but too little can be even worse. It's finding that balance is what we really want.

This particular regulation is something I see as good for the public.

 

 

Why do we have so many regulations in our country? As Paul Harvey used to say, "Self government without discipline wont work".

 

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might be worth keeping in mind that the Internet has had a close association with the US government going back to 1969 when an Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), later the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), project transmitted the first packet transmission over the nascent ARPANET that eventually evolved into the Internet as we know it today. Up until 1998, the Internet IP number allocations and Domain Name System (DNS) was being maintain primarily by Jon Postel at USC's Information Sciences Institute under a contract with the US Dept of Defense. In 1998, those functions were moved to the newly formed non-profit Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), funded by the US Dept of Commerce, which continues today. Now that the FCC has brought the Internet under Title II, I think we'll need to keep a close eye on how they apply the existing rules, and what new rules specific to the medium are put in place. If they manage that aspect as well as the other agencies have managed their aspects of the Internet over the years, we as end users may be all the better for it. If not, we could be in for a bumpy ride, but I still think we'll be better off than leaving it in the hands of for profit corporate interests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I hope it works out well, but I'm skeptical. In reality I think it will be an expensive mixed bag - some good and some bad, while we all pick up the tab.

 

Government regulation costs $$$. How are they going to pay for it? Sock it to the ISPs who will then pass it on to us, along with the added costs from their compliance attorneys?

 

How many prospective new web entrepreneurs will look at the 300+ pages of red tape and decide it's just not worth the start-up costs and effort to ensure compliance?

 

If the speed of connections like Netflix suffers, where it buffers a lot, then I will drop the service (maybe just use their DVD service.) I just that I hate to see it go. Oh well.

 

It's nothing I can't live without. Neither is the Internet, if taxes and compliance costs drive the price up where it is unaffordable.

 

No one want's anarchy, but a little freedom would be nice now and then. Sadly more and more people are choosing security over freedom. I don't have to tell you what Ben Franklin said about that, do I?

 

I wonder how long I'll be able to make comments like that before the FCC will simply censor it out. Isn't censorship of "public utilities" (which the Internet has now become) the FCCs responsibility? Or will porn sites now be granted "equal access" to schools and libraries?

 

As P.J. O'Rourke said, "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."

 

Chip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm convinced this is bad.

 

I'm convinced this is good.

 

Sorry it took me awhile to respond, as I was still catching up on my Netflix shows that were slowed down by Verizon.

 

Of course, if I do a Google search on the subject of Net Neutrality, I must sort my way thru the top responders that had paid to be so.

 

So, perhaps I should wait to see how this all sorts out...

 

Regulations are good, or bad, depending upon what I want at any given time. Yes, I as an american am fickle...

 

My own thoughts?

 

1) Keep the internet open. Keep the content non filtered based upon whomever pays the most.

 

2) We pay taxes for so many things. If part of this is to compensate the providers to the internet freeway for their investment - I'm OK with this. (Heck, I'm paying fuel taxes to keep or highways in good shape - that is working well too...)

 

All kidding aside, I'm very hopeful that this will be more 'positive' than 'negative'. Wireless infrastructure companies have been collecting fees for decades and decades. Cable companies have been collecting fees for many more decades than wireless companies. So IMO, they've been compensated for their expenditures...

 

I like to think the wireless, and cable companies will not be hurt by this, and actually might open up some of the bandwidth capabilities not yet tapped.

 

And as always, my thoughts could be different then some of yours!!!

 

Best to all,

Smitty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Careful RV. Having had to live with narrow banding for our emergency responders these past few years I can tell you its definitely not all roses and chocolates. Narrow banding just plain does not work well with elevation intensive terrain (nooks, crannies, gullies and rolling hills). Biggest boon for cell phones was switching from analog to digital allowing far greater mux capacity.

 

Careful RV? Of what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might be worth keeping in mind that the Internet has had a close association with the US government going back to 1969 when an Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), later the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), project transmitted the first packet transmission over the nascent ARPANET that eventually evolved into the Internet as we know it today. Up until 1998, the Internet IP number allocations and Domain Name System (DNS) was being maintain primarily by Jon Postel at USC's Information Sciences Institute under a contract with the US Dept of Defense. In 1998, those functions were moved to the newly formed non-profit Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), funded by the US Dept of Commerce, which continues today. Now that the FCC has brought the Internet under Title II, I think we'll need to keep a close eye on how they apply the existing rules, and what new rules specific to the medium are put in place. If they manage that aspect as well as the other agencies have managed their aspects of the Internet over the years, we as end users may be all the better for it. If not, we could be in for a bumpy ride, but I still think we'll be better off than leaving it in the hands of for profit corporate interests.

 

Well said Dutch!

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

RVers Online University

campgroundviews.com

Our program provides accurate individual wheel weights for your RV, toad, and tow vehicle, and will help you trim the pounds if you need to.

RV Cable Grip

All the water you need...No matter where you go

Country Thunder Iowa

Nomad Internet

Rv Share

Dish For My RV.

RV Air.

Find out more or sign up for Escapees RV'ers Bootcamp.

Advertise your product or service here.

The Rvers- Now Streaming

RVTravel.com Logo



×
×
  • Create New...