Internet Neutrality

[Queen K]

http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/14/technol ... index.html


Is 'net neutrality important or not important? Do we even have the faintest idea what NO net neutrality really is going to mean in a society where we've been accustomed to it for so long?

What do you think?

[Even Steven]

For 99% of people, it's a non-issue.

[Merry]

Just watched a segment on CBC news about this topic. Sounds as though it could eventually result in people being charged for different levels of service (similar to cable) depending on which services they choose to subscribe to. So services could be "bundled", and people could buy for example a "social media package" or a "video streaming package" and so on.

Right now the legislation only applies in the States, but as was pointed out on the program, much of our Internet content originates (or passes through) there, so this change in delivery could end up impacting us anyway. According to the show, ISP's being allowed to charge differing amounts for access to different types of content could become a huge cash cow for them (and a big financial hit for the rest of us).

[Omnitheo]

Internet isn’t going to suddenly get cheaper for you because you only use Castanet. You’ll still pay the same for the base package, plus a premium for news sites. Why is YouTube and Netflix so slow? Oh I gotta add a package for video streaming. Can’t access amazon? Might have to add in the eshopping package for the holiday season. Strange, why can’t I suddenly access half of the sites that match my political affiliation?

To say it will not matter to 99% of people is ridiculous. The internet has become a major part of commerce. eBay, Amazon, YouTube, Twitch, Etsy, Patreon. Those are just some big ones. Millions of people have their own websites for specialized products or services they offer, and individually they will have no bargaining power next to bigger companies. Maybe Best Buy doesn’t want some small chain selling cheap cables and undercutting the massive markups they get from them. They can get the ISPs to restrict traffic to the smaller sites. It’s basically like if you’re used to eating at Woodfire Bakery, but then Subway lobbies the city to change the roads. Suddenly there’s a highway going straight to subway, and woodfire is locked behind a toll booth that only lets a few people through a very slow road.

There’s a reason why big companies keep lobbying against net neutrality. There’s profit in it for them. Both from consumers who will have to pay extra, and from larger services who will pay the telecoms to give priority to their traffic. Raking in money from both sides while small businesses suffer losses.

This stifles entrepneourship. Culture, Opportunity. Likely many of the services on the internet you use today would not have been able to get started were there not net neutrality.

[Ka-El]

This stifles entrepneourship. Culture, Opportunity. Likely many of the services on the internet you use today would not have been able to get started were there not net neutrality.

The implications around censorship are also very concerning. Yes, there is the very real truth that a good deal of what gets posted on Facebook and other social media sites is crap, bullpoop, aka "fake news", but we are just going to have to depend on enough people being educated enough to figure some things out for themselves ("it was the most people at an inauguration ever!"), or at least have the inclination to seek alternative sources or do some fact-checking before lapping up all that tripe. However, we had people believing in chemtrail conspiracies long before "fake news" even became a thing.

[CapitalB]

The major problem with it is that getting rid of net neutrality basically paves the way for internet monopolies. Basically if access to various websites is chopped into different payment tiers theres a good chance that smaller companies will be relegated to some kind of add on tier. This would effectively reduce their access to customers via online significantly, also if they were competing with one of the monopolies in some way they would be at an additional competitive disadvantage.

[saynoto]

http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/14/technology/fcc-net-neutrality-vote/index.html


Is 'net neutrality important or not important? Do we even have the faintest idea what NO net neutrality really is going to mean in a society where we've been accustomed to it for so long?

What do you think?

It's only been around since 2015. Not really that long.

[Omnitheo]

Net neutrality regulations were enforced in 2015, but the net has been neutral since it’s inception. Major telecoms were involved in controversies for attempting to throttle specific traffic until regulations were passed ensuring neutrality. The chairman involved in this change even admitted to being in telecoms pocket and joked about it

[Even Steven]

I'm not sure if I'm familiar with this InterMet thing.

[Verum]

The sad thing is that anyone, and I mean absolutely anyone I know, who understands this and who is not directly employed by a telco, is completely against this. There is no significant public support for this. Each and every techie with half a brain is against this and strongly so, but we have reached a place where rather than drain the swamp, Trump has just filled it with corporate lackeys who will do what is in the interests of the old corporations. The experts, their opinions and the interests of the people are taking a back seat to fringe groups and corporate lobbying. We see this in the banned word-list, the abolition of Net Neutrality and the push for building a border wall.

This will kill off tech innovation in the US and hurt it elsewhere. It will further the increasing international irrelevance of the US and put them further and further behind the curve. Ask anyone who has ever written a web based application if this is a good thing. Look at Youtube, Netflix, Wikipedia, Facebook and any other website you frequent and get comfortable that there will fewer new innovative additions to that list and possibly a few reductions, because the costs of breaking through will be prohibitive.

The change will take a few years, the big telcos will not want it to appear too drastic, for fear of massive public backlash and reintroduction of Net Neutrality laws, but it will come and only those who get dividends or cheques from a big telco company will see any benefit. The rest of us will see decline in innovation, poor service and quite possibly a contraction of internet services.

[Symbonite]

This is what people should really rally around. Especially when it comes to how people get their information and what companies tell you what and where you get it at what speed...

Most people do not get what Net Neutrality is but when you put it to a burger....well thats a different story..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=170&v=ltzy5vRmN8Q