First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next  Last
Post Reply FCC enforces net neutrality
29118 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
83 / F / Bite the pillow.
Offline
Posted 2/26/15 , edited 2/26/15
Just went down... not sure how much it will affect Crunchyroll and what-not. Interesting regardless:

- FCC enforces net neutrality, voting to regulate broadband providers as common carriers under Title II and ban paid fast lanes
- http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/fcc-votes-for-net-neutrality-a-ban-on-paid-fast-lanes-and-title-ii/

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today voted to enforce net neutrality rules that prevent Internet providers—including cellular carriers—from blocking or throttling traffic or giving priority to Web services in exchange for payment.

More of the story at the link above...

Further reading:

- FCC overrules state laws to help cities build out municipal broadband
- http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/26/8114205/fcc-decision-municipal-broadband-internet

Before it tackles net neutrality, the FCC is setting a major precedent for municipal broadband: it's just voted to preempt state laws that were preventing two cities from building out their own locally run broadband networks.

The decision was prompted by separate petitions from Wilson, North Carolina, and Chattanooga, Tennessee — both cities that've established high-speed, gigabit internet services, but have been barred from expanding to neighboring communities due to existing state laws. So far, 19 states have similar regulations to those that the FCC is overriding in Wilson and Chattanooga, but today's ruling affects only those two specific cases.

- FCC's enforcement of net neutrality rules confirms the Internet is a mainstream political issue
- http://www.buzzfeed.com/mathonan/now-the-internet-belongs-to-us-and-to-politics#.cePV5Qz36
Posted 2/26/15
I understand how it's troubling, but the origins of the internet was government usage, and it does need regulation to a certain extent.

So honestly, I dont know what to really say, Im not fully versed on the situation and not really invested as much as others, admittedly.
Posted 2/26/15
Good for you lot I guess
32077 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Los Angeles, CA
Offline
Posted 2/26/15
Seems like a good thing but who knows? We will find out in 3-5 years how it really affects everything.
35064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/26/15 , edited 2/26/15
I don't claim to be especially tech savvy, but it seems to me that the core of the issue is that all data packets are currently given equal priority (neutrality) in their speed of service. That sounds like the right thing to do in order to avoid granting ISPs the ability to "rig the game" as it were concerning matters of electronic commerce, but there may be legitimate technical concerns created by treating all data packets equally which I'm not fully understanding.
55520 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / 風の山
Offline
Posted 2/26/15
don't think this law will do to much in the first few years or so. also to blueoni's concern seems very legitimate. how would it affect sites that uses high broadband vs a smaller site in the long run.
3606 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / F / Chicagoland ~
Offline
Posted 2/26/15 , edited 3/4/15
It keeps from throttling anyone that hasn't paid out the ass for their content up on the web. It's not going to keep big companies like Netflix from being able to get an acceptable load through. It just keeps them from allowing small sites like what friends of mine have (and what I myself have, even though I haven't posted in a little while) from loading slower than dial up. It's the same sort of thing just like with phones or television.

I'm personally seriously glad this finally went through. Now I don't have to worry like I did before.
5113 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Midwestern United...
Offline
Posted 2/26/15 , edited 2/28/15
Edit: I would have come back and made some edits (and a response) sooner but I kept getting am error trying to access Crunchyroll.

After being told I was wrong by so many I was... not really convinced. KisaiGate gave me some enough to crack through my stubbornness so I went ahead and re-researched the matter. Sure enough, I was half remembering the situation and getting certain terms wrong. Embarrassing? Absolutely. I'm still not thrilled with the FCC being in charge of the matter but I was indeed wrong; at this point something legislative did have to happen. It seems dishonest of me to delete my foolish comments but at the same time leaving them up could lead to further confusion, hence why I'm adding this in front of them via the Edit feature (plus making a follow up comment).



BlueOni wrote:

I don't claim to be especially tech savvy, but it seems to me that the core of the issue is that all data packets are currently given equal priority (neutrality) in their speed of service. That sounds like the right thing to do in order to avoid granting ISPs the ability to "rig the game" as it were concerning matters of electronic commerce, but there may be legitimate technical concerns created by treating all data packets equally which I'm not fully understanding.


There is a lot most supporters don't understand. Increasing government control of the internet will most likely increase operating costs and decrease personal liberty... you know what usually happens with increased government control. It isn't "neutral" to force everyone to get the same regardless of what they are willing and able to pay...

...or perhaps supporters would like to apply the same logic to everything else. For example at school everyone can get the same grade based on the mean of scores earned by their classmates. Crunchyroll could start offering less to paid subscribers and more to those with a free account or no account at all.
35064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/26/15 , edited 2/26/15

KamisamanoOtaku wrote:

There is a lot most supporters don't understand. Increasing government control of the internet will most likely increase operating costs and decrease personal liberty... you know what usually happens with increased government control. It isn't "neutral" to force everyone to get the same regardless of what they are willing and able to pay.


Here's the thing, though: net neutrality is the status quo, and personal liberty hasn't been substantially curtailed in the US as far as net neutrality's effects are concerned. People are concerned about programs like PRISM, but really think about that for a second. Would not having net neutrality have substantively impeded PRISM? Like...at all? I can't really see how. As for the increased operating costs for ISPs, they're worth it to preserve an environment of fair competition between internet services.

I think the strongest argument against net neutrality will have to be technical in nature, not ethical or economic.
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 2/26/15

BlueOni wrote:

I don't claim to be especially tech savvy, but it seems to me that the core of the issue is that all data packets are currently given equal priority (neutrality) in their speed of service. That sounds like the right thing to do in order to avoid granting ISPs the ability to "rig the game" as it were concerning matters of electronic commerce, but there may be legitimate technical concerns created by treating all data packets equally which I'm not fully understanding.



Dammit. Someone beat me to the story.

Anyway, regarding the comment quoted, No.

The packets ARE all the same. basically you can't charge netflix for their packets because they use the tubes more than say, comcast's internet cable TV service because you use comcast internet. You can't give amazon preference over walden books because amazon pays comcast more money for that added advantage. In other countries it also implies you cannot detract from bit torrent users because you suspect what they do is illegal (you can still get illegal users from other methods perhaps)

The judgement of the internet as a utility has an even larger impact. This means its on par with your phone, water, and electricity bill. an, theoretically, means that you cannot restrict or charge outrageous fees for a tiered system of data traffic. This kinda goes hand in hand with their decision earlier this year to raise the cap on what was considered "broadband" from a measly 3Mbps to 25Mbps, which is more in line with the global average internet speed (and that includes a lot of countries with crappy internet. Some of our european friends are getting 100Mbps, though they may be paying a premium somehow).

It MIGHT have a negative effect in that you get charged per GB of usage, rather than speed in general, much like how your electric and water bills aren't paid for the gallons per minute, but the gallons themselves, so this might affect your bills for better or worse, but it's still a huge change.
40007 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/26/15
Net Neutrality died and then returns a year later. (And people act like its a new ideal....)
35064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/26/15

serifsansserif wrote:

Dammit. Someone beat me to the story.

Anyway, regarding the comment quoted, No.

The packets ARE all the same. basically you can't charge netflix for their packets because they use the tubes more than say, comcast's internet cable TV service because you use comcast internet. You can't give amazon preference over walden books because amazon pays comcast more money for that added advantage. In other countries it also implies you cannot detract from bit torrent users because you suspect what they do is illegal (you can still get illegal users from other methods perhaps)


Well, then that's the last of it. It protects a level playing field in the electronic marketplace for all competitors and entrants by eliminating a possible avenue for collusion between ISPs and present electronic market players, and it imposes no substantial technical barriers. I don't really see the problem.


The judgement of the internet as a utility has an even larger impact. This means its on par with your phone, water, and electricity bill. an, theoretically, means that you cannot restrict or charge outrageous fees for a tiered system of data traffic. This kinda goes hand in hand with their decision earlier this year to raise the cap on what was considered "broadband" from a measly 3Mbps to 25Mbps, which is more in line with the global average internet speed (and that includes a lot of countries with crappy internet. Some of our european friends are getting 100Mbps, though they may be paying a premium somehow).

It MIGHT have a negative effect in that you get charged per GB of usage, rather than speed in general, much like how your electric and water bills aren't paid for the gallons per minute, but the gallons themselves, so this might affect your bills for better or worse, but it's still a huge change.


A mixed bag, that one. We'll see how that goes.
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 2/26/15

BlueOni wrote:


KamisamanoOtaku wrote:

There is a lot most supporters don't understand. Increasing government control of the internet will most likely increase operating costs and decrease personal liberty... you know what usually happens with increased government control. It isn't "neutral" to force everyone to get the same regardless of what they are willing and able to pay.


Here's the thing, though: net neutrality is the status quo, and personal liberty hasn't been substantially curtailed in the US as far as net neutrality's effects are concerned. People are concerned about programs like PRISM, but really think about that for a second. Would not having net neutrality have substantively impeded PRISM? Like...at all? I can't really see how. As for the increased operating costs for ISPs, they're worth it to preserve an environment of fair competition between internet services.

I think the strongest argument against net neutrality will have to be technical in nature, not ethical or economic.


Actually, I'd argue that since it's been a debate for so many years, there's probably things in place already that make the internet unfair. These past few decisions are primarily focused at dealing with the problem of ISP's.... Which act like we're all the sudden going to go back to the days of dialup where you have to wait for a phone call because the line's in use....

But to answer your technical problem, the biggest slow down on the internet happens in the "last mile".... which isn't as much a problem anywhere else outside of the US, and it's been demonstrable that in other countries higher limits on speed and greater usage are both possible and a reality. From our past we can already see that we went from 56K being fast to the current speeds and usage in a matter of 15-20 years, and the technology kept up with it.

"wifi" is based on old technology but it's something that didn't really exist 15 years ago, and now, we have internet streaming via satellites to our houses and and our cell phones, and our home lines can stream several Mbps to our neighbor's house (if not a block away).

What IS bad though is that through advertising and search rank, sites are no longer on an equal footing. Due to region locking, you aren't able to access the content, even if the "tubes" are clear.

It's still not certain how this is going to be interpreted and how it's going to affect pricing via the ISP's.

It's not the government that's the problem here, it's the corporations that are, ina very capitalistic free market way, trying to maximize their profits while minimizing their losses.
33399 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Socal
Offline
Posted 2/26/15

serifsansserif wrote:


BlueOni wrote:

I don't claim to be especially tech savvy, but it seems to me that the core of the issue is that all data packets are currently given equal priority (neutrality) in their speed of service. That sounds like the right thing to do in order to avoid granting ISPs the ability to "rig the game" as it were concerning matters of electronic commerce, but there may be legitimate technical concerns created by treating all data packets equally which I'm not fully understanding.



Dammit. Someone beat me to the story.

Anyway, regarding the comment quoted, No.

The packets ARE all the same. basically you can't charge netflix for their packets because they use the tubes more than say, comcast's internet cable TV service because you use comcast internet. You can't give amazon preference over walden books because amazon pays comcast more money for that added advantage. In other countries it also implies you cannot detract from bit torrent users because you suspect what they do is illegal (you can still get illegal users from other methods perhaps)

The judgement of the internet as a utility has an even larger impact. This means its on par with your phone, water, and electricity bill. an, theoretically, means that you cannot restrict or charge outrageous fees for a tiered system of data traffic. This kinda goes hand in hand with their decision earlier this year to raise the cap on what was considered "broadband" from a measly 3Mbps to 25Mbps, which is more in line with the global average internet speed (and that includes a lot of countries with crappy internet. Some of our european friends are getting 100Mbps, though they may be paying a premium somehow).

It MIGHT have a negative effect in that you get charged per GB of usage, rather than speed in general, much like how your electric and water bills aren't paid for the gallons per minute, but the gallons themselves, so this might affect your bills for better or worse, but it's still a huge change.


If that happens gamers and streamers are f**ked, well in the U.S. anyway. Hell it's even worse for uploads.

We'll good thing I've been practicing my Japanese. I also always wanted to visit Korea too.

Mushu

Pack your bags Cri-Kee, we're movin' out.

9447 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 2/26/15
Internet 2. -_-
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.