I don't really understand net neutrality

JohnnySavage said:

So the Congressional bill prohibits the FCC from regulating providers as utilities, and it prohibits the providers from, say, charging customers $10 per month to access lit?

The FCC wants (believes it has) authority to regulate the providers as utilities. Do they take a position on whether or not a provider could charge for different data streams?

Click to expand...

The FCC's formal positions, according to Chairman Wheeler, won't become public until next month.

"You'll notice that I have not addressed any of the specifics," Wheeler said. "You have to wait until February to see the specifics."

Click to expand...

The Congress of the United States of America is elected by the People...

...the Federal Communication Commission was created by Congress, is empowered by Congress, and its Chairperson and Commissioners are political appointees.

The Internet was primarily invented through the push of the federal government and, since anarchy is nothing but utopian fantasy, some entity of government must oversee it - the question is which entity holds the constitutional authority to do so...

...the only constitutional answer is the Congress.

The sooner folks cease all the politically-partisan grandstanding and start concentrating fully on pushing Congress to come up with the most awesome Internet legislation in the world...

...the better.

JohnnySavage said:

So the Congressional bill prohibits the FCC from regulating providers as utilities, and it prohibits the providers from, say, charging customers $10 per month to access lit?

The FCC wants (believes it has) authority to regulate the providers as utilities. Do they take a position on whether or not a provider could charge for different data streams?

Click to expand...

The immediate effect of that will be an increase in your internet charges of approx. $6-7/mo. (Utility excise taxes.) For which you will receive nothing in return. It is quite literally a tax increase posing as something 'helpful.'

Ishmael

And so the deflection goes...

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission just said he's proposing the "strongest open Internet protections" the Web has ever seen.

In a Wired op-ed, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced he wants to regulate Internet providers with the most aggressive tool at his disposal: Title II of the Communications Act. In addition to covering fixed broadband providers such as Comcast and Time Warner Cable, the draft rules would cover wireless providers such as T-Mobile and Sprint.

The rules would make speeding up or slowing down Web traffic — a tactic known as prioritization — illegal. It would also ban the blocking of Web traffic.

"My proposal assures the rights of Internet users to go where they want, when they want," Wheeler wrote, "and the rights of innovators to introduce new products without asking anyone’s permission."

The FCC is expected to vote on Wheeler's proposed rules on Feb. 26.

The draft rules seek to impose a modified version of Title II, which was originally written to regulate telephone companies. It will waive a number of provisions, including parts of the law that empower the FCC to set retail prices — something Internet providers fear above all.

However, contrary to many people's expectations, the draft rules will also keep other parts of Title II that allow the FCC to: enforce privacy rules on carriers; extract funds from Internet providers to be used as subsidies; and make sure services like Google Fiber can build new broadband pipes more easily, according to people familiar with the plan.


WaPo

JohnnySavage said:

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission just said he's proposing the "strongest open Internet protections" the Web has ever seen.

In a Wired op-ed, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced he wants to regulate Internet providers with the most aggressive tool at his disposal: Title II of the Communications Act. In addition to covering fixed broadband providers such as Comcast and Time Warner Cable, the draft rules would cover wireless providers such as T-Mobile and Sprint.

The rules would make speeding up or slowing down Web traffic — a tactic known as prioritization — illegal. It would also ban the blocking of Web traffic.

"My proposal assures the rights of Internet users to go where they want, when they want," Wheeler wrote, "and the rights of innovators to introduce new products without asking anyone’s permission."

The FCC is expected to vote on Wheeler's proposed rules on Feb. 26.

The draft rules seek to impose a modified version of Title II, which was originally written to regulate telephone companies. It will waive a number of provisions, including parts of the law that empower the FCC to set retail prices — something Internet providers fear above all.

However, contrary to many people's expectations, the draft rules will also keep other parts of Title II that allow the FCC to: enforce privacy rules on carriers; extract funds from Internet providers to be used as subsidies; and make sure services like Google Fiber can build new broadband pipes more easily, according to people familiar with the plan.


WaPo

Click to expand...

Hurrah!

JohnnySavage said:

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission just said he's proposing the "strongest open Internet protections" the Web has ever seen.

In a Wired op-ed, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced he wants to regulate Internet providers with the most aggressive tool at his disposal: Title II of the Communications Act. In addition to covering fixed broadband providers such as Comcast and Time Warner Cable, the draft rules would cover wireless providers such as T-Mobile and Sprint.

The rules would make speeding up or slowing down Web traffic — a tactic known as prioritization — illegal. It would also ban the blocking of Web traffic.

"My proposal assures the rights of Internet users to go where they want, when they want," Wheeler wrote, "and the rights of innovators to introduce new products without asking anyone’s permission."

The FCC is expected to vote on Wheeler's proposed rules on Feb. 26.

The draft rules seek to impose a modified version of Title II, which was originally written to regulate telephone companies. It will waive a number of provisions, including parts of the law that empower the FCC to set retail prices — something Internet providers fear above all.

However, contrary to many people's expectations, the draft rules will also keep other parts of Title II that allow the FCC to: enforce privacy rules on carriers; extract funds from Internet providers to be used as subsidies; and make sure services like Google Fiber can build new broadband pipes more easily, according to people familiar with the plan.


WaPo

Click to expand...

Now watch every idiot that ever read a Ayn Rand book come in and tell us how government intervention will now signify the death of the internet due to rising costs.

Libsam said:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is the leading nonprofit organization defending civil liberties in the digital world.

Click to expand...

And

The Association of Government Accountants is the member organization for financial professionals in government.

What's your point?

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/9873757f97/porn-star-net-neutrality



explained by pornstars so its crystal clear

Sean said:

Hurrah!

Click to expand...

You see the Chairman's announcement abetting your love for illegal downloading?

Tumblr's "Save the Internet" page with lots of info about Title II and different links to what you can do about it.

https://www.tumblr.com/everybodyontheinternet

JohnnySavage said:

And

The Association of Government Accountants is the member organization for financial professionals in government.

What's your point?

Click to expand...

The OP said they didn't understand net nuetrality. Reading articles from the EFF has helped me understand a bit better, so I shared the link.

JohnnySavage said:

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission just said he's proposing the "strongest open Internet protections" the Web has ever seen.

In a Wired op-ed, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced he wants to regulate Internet providers with the most aggressive tool at his disposal: Title II of the Communications Act. In addition to covering fixed broadband providers such as Comcast and Time Warner Cable, the draft rules would cover wireless providers such as T-Mobile and Sprint.

The rules would make speeding up or slowing down Web traffic — a tactic known as prioritization — illegal. It would also ban the blocking of Web traffic.

"My proposal assures the rights of Internet users to go where they want, when they want," Wheeler wrote, "and the rights of innovators to introduce new products without asking anyone’s permission."

The FCC is expected to vote on Wheeler's proposed rules on Feb. 26.

The draft rules seek to impose a modified version of Title II, which was originally written to regulate telephone companies. It will waive a number of provisions, including parts of the law that empower the FCC to set retail prices — something Internet providers fear above all.

However, contrary to many people's expectations, the draft rules will also keep other parts of Title II that allow the FCC to: enforce privacy rules on carriers; extract funds from Internet providers to be used as subsidies; and make sure services like Google Fiber can build new broadband pipes more easily, according to people familiar with the plan.


WaPo

Click to expand...

There is good and bad all in that one paragraph.

The bad is that it's another fucking tax that is going to be passed on to the consumer and 'subsidy' is just another word for 'wealth transfer.' This tax is on top of the wealth transfer tax passed by congress that is already part of your internet bill. Way to double dip Mr. Fed.

The good part is that the new rule will prevent cities/counties from granting monopolies to service providers. Depending on how the rule is written this has the potential to open up competition in urban and suburban communities.

The whole 'security' mantra is bullshit. You will get no more security than you are able to secure for yourself, and none from the prying eyes of your very own government.

Ishmael

Here's a Twitter shot today of FCC Republican Commissioner Ajit Pai holding up FCC Democrat Chairman Tom Wheeler's 332-page "net neutrality" plan with was distributed to all FCC Commissioners yesterday:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9LAFM7CEAE-EHP.jpg

https://twitter.com/AjitPaiFCC/status/563724099906568193/photo/1

The good news, I guess, is President Obama's plan is 1 page shorter than the entire 1996 Telecommunications Act which houses the infamous Title II that Obama and Wheeler now deem to place broadband services under...

...of course, the bad news is that the Plan is not open for public inspection - that's right: We the People cannot read what is in President Obama's Plan. We will only find out what's in it after the FCC Commissioners vote on it February 26.

eyer said:

Here's a Twitter shot today of FCC Republican Commissioner Ajit Pai holding up FCC Democrat Chairman Tom Wheeler's 332-page "net neutrality" plan with was distributed to all FCC Commissioners yesterday:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9LAFM7CEAE-EHP.jpg

https://twitter.com/AjitPaiFCC/status/563724099906568193/photo/1

The good news, I guess, is President Obama's plan is 1 page shorter than the entire 1996 Telecommunications Act which houses the infamous Title II that Obama and Wheeler now deem to place broadband services under...

...of course, the bad news is that the Plan is not open for public inspection - that's right: We the People cannot read what is in President Obama's Plan. We will only find out what's in it after the FCC Commissioners vote on it February 26.

Click to expand...

Well, you have to pass it to find out what's in it, naturally.

Some more statements re. the PLAN.

Pai begins to speak out.


There are two aspects of this plan that are distressing. The first is that the board plans on ramming this through without public comment. (Shades of "We have to pass it to see what's in it." The second is that there are going to be substantial tax and fee increases that are going to be passed along to the consumer.

The answer to the supposed problems is more competition. Both in the form of more competition re. the back bone providers as well as the 'last mile' providers. The internet has been around long enough now that the early providers have recovered their investments, the emphasis should be on prohibiting state, county, and local administrative bodies from granting monopolies.

Ishmael

Obamanet...

...formerly known as the free and open Internet, soon to be completely regulated by a government agency whose leadership is entirely nominated by the President in Office and confirmed by the Senate in session.

Distributed to the four Commissioners weeks ago, Chairman Wheeler's new 332-page regulation plan to invoke total, federal government "utility" Title II control over the Internet has been purposely kept secret from public scrutiny and is scheduled to be voted on by the 5 below this Thursday.

But Commissioners Pai and O'Rielly today called on their two fellow Commissioners and Chairman Wheeler to release the plan for public scrutiny and to delay the vote for at least 30 days to allow Americans to discuss the plan first.


Tom Wheeler | Chairman - Democrat

- nominated by President Obama and unanimously confirmed by the Senate; designated by the President to be Chairman

"Wheeler worked as a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry, with positions including President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association."

"During Barack Obama's presidential campaign Wheeler spent six weeks in Iowa aiding his campaign efforts and went on to raise over US$500,000 for Obama's campaigns." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Wheeler]


Mignon Clyburn | Commissioner - Democrat

- first appointed by President Obama as Acting Chairwoman of the FCC, then nominated and confirmed as a Commissioner

"daughter of U.S. Representative Jim Clyburn and a member of the Federal Communications Commission...served for 11 years as the representative of South Carolina's 6th congressional district on the South Carolina Public Service Commission (PSC)...served as the chair of the PSC from July 2002 through July 2004...On November 21, 2014 she participated in a reddit AMA in which she was critiziced by users for unsatisfactorily answering questions about how the FCC has handled net neutrality rulemaking." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mignon_Clyburn]


Jessica Rosenworcel | Commissioner - Democrat

- nominated by President Obama and confirmed unanimously by the Senate

"Prior to joining the FCC, she served as Senior Communications Counsel to the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, under the leadership of Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (D–WV). She previously served in the same role on the Committee under the leadership of Senator Daniel K. Inouye (D–HI)" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Rosenworcel]


Ajit Pai | Commissioner - Republican

- nominateed by President Obama and unanimously confirmed by the Senate

"clerked for Martin Leach-Cross Feldman of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana...worked for the United States Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division as an Honors Program trial attorney on the Telecommunications Task Force. There, he worked on proposed mergers and acquisitions and on novel requests for regulatory relief following the enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996...Associate General Counsel at Verizon Communications...Deputy Chief Counsel to the United States Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts...Department of Justice Senior Counsel in the Office of Legal Policy...Chief Counsel to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Property Rights...FCC's Office of General Counsel...Washington, D.C. office of law firm Jenner & Block where he was a Partner in the Communications Practice...[FCC Commissioner]at the recommendation of Minority leader Mitch McConnell." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajit_Varadaraj_Pai]


Michael O’Rielly | Commissioner - Republican

- nominateed by President Obama and unanimously confirmed by the Senate

"Legislative Assistant to U.S. Congressman Tom Bliley...Professional Staff Member on the Committee on Energy and Commerce in the United States House of Representatives from 1998 to 2003, and Telecommunications Policy Analyst...Legislative Director from 2007 to 2009, and Senior Legislative Assistant from 2003 to 2007 in the Office of U.S. Senator John Sununu...Republican Policy Committee in the U.S. Senate as a Policy Analyst for Banking, Technology, Transportation, Trade, and Commerce...Prior to joining the agency Commissioner O’Rielly served as a Policy Advisor in the Office of the Senate Republican Whip, led by U.S. Senator John Cornyn, since January 2013. He worked in the Republican Whip’s Office since 2010, as an Advisor from 2010 to 2012 and Deputy Chief of Staff and Policy Director from 2012 to 2013 for U.S. Senator Jon Kyl." [http://www.fcc.gov/leadership/michael-orielly]


A simply majority is all that's needed to keep the 332-page plan secret, to hold the vote Thursday without any public discussion of it at all, and to invoke Title II Thursday, thereby deeming the Internet - and everything that's associated with it - for the first time in its history now totally under the control and regulation of the Federal Communication Commission...

...can you ever guess how undoubtedly the vote will go?

It's just a way for monopolistic corporate interests to further censor and control the internet.

Mike_Yates said:

It's just a way for monopolistic corporate interests to further censor and control the internet.

Click to expand...

Will you pull my finger, Mike?

JohnnySavage said:

I don't want to pay more or be throttled... so I guess I'm pro-Net Neutrality.

In my neighborhood, we have two interweb providers: Comcast via cable and Verizon via Fios. Both are over priced but there you go. I have the 50 MB package from Comcast for $65 per month.

I really have no way of knowing though if I'm getting what I pay for. My porn plays fine (although I only need a few 5-minute clips) and my NetFlix works fine.

Click to expand...

I have /satellite/ internet. They're already raping me for like 1.5m . They do this shit I'm slitting throats. I'm /supposed/ to be getting 30, but I've called them once a month, every month, since I got it because I'm topping out at 1.5. But they KNOW that they're my only option so they fuck with me.

Here. You need to know that because they might be, and probably are, fucking you. Go test your connection upload and download speed. I can't watch TV if the gf is playing on-line. I fucking hate Hugesnet... AT&T is /supposed/ to be expanding coverage out this way. My mom has it and it's a million times better than this shit we got. As soon as they expand I'm snatching that shit up and I'm going to personally call the satelite people and tell them what I think of their subpar product /and/ service.

Plus the fucking internet won't go off in the rain and/or snow.

Up until the 90's motels/hotels would typically list a phone in the room as a plus for people choosing a place to stay. Then it became a data port. Today it's WiFi.

A strong argument could be made that internet access has become a utility like lights in the room, water in the room, phone service in the room. They are all taken for granted now and they are all utilities. Soon internet access will be taken for granted.

Congress wrote the DMCA. That should tell you all you need to know about their ability (as a group) to understand technology, much less write decent legislation regarding it.
Just two examples:
Congress felt it was appropriate for me to face criminal penalties of $1,000,000 and 10 years in prison for unlocking my and my wife's cell phones without our carrier's permission.
The DMCA made black magic markers illegal to manufacture, sell or possess because they could be used to defeat some CD copy protection.

JohnnySavage said:

I feel like a man should have an opinion.

Speaking of: Today I went to the dump and threw out a whole truck-load of stuff. It pained my soul because I'm frugal and I could have gotten a buck or two for some of that junk... but at times a man just had to put aside his frugalities in the interest of divestiture

A man should also know how to make a fire.

Click to expand...

Hey man sometimes it's worth tossing just to free up the space....

As for OP, I don't have a clue...so I'm going with the default "The opposite of whatever the GOP is pushing."

about_average said:

Congress wrote the DMCA. That should tell you all you need to know about their ability (as a group) to understand technology, much less write decent legislation regarding it.
Just two examples:
Congress felt it was appropriate for me to face criminal penalties of $1,000,000 and 10 years in prison for unlocking my and my wife's cell phones without our carrier's permission.

Click to expand...

Congress also wrote the Communications Act of 1934, which created the FCC...

...and it's current Chairman no doubt lobbied for legislation to lock cell phones, as did probably one, if not two of the current FCC Commissioners.

Your point was supposed to be?

about_average said:

The DMCA made black magic markers illegal to manufacture, sell or possess because they could be used to defeat some CD copy protection.

Click to expand...

That's gotta be one of the most stupidly ridiculous offerings I've read on the GB in a while...

...thanx for the laugh.

Ishmael said:

The answer to the supposed problems is more competition. Both in the form of more competition re. the back bone providers as well as the 'last mile' providers. The internet has been around long enough now that the early providers have recovered their investments, the emphasis should be on prohibiting state, county, and local administrative bodies from granting monopolies.

Ishmael

Click to expand...

Once again, a glib "solution" from Ishmael.

More competition isn't going to help, because of the cost of entering a market. Internet providers are exploiting their near-monopoly status to extract more profits from both consumers and content providers.

Internet providers have been shown to be very resistant to upgrading the quality of their product in America.

Watch this. It will tell you all you need to know.
http://youtu.be/fpbOEoRrHyU