- Status
figmentPez
Staff member
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
and you're happy about this because...?
and you're happy about this because...?
C
Chazwozel
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
Um, you do realize that if you have Comcast, now they have the right to cancel any P2P sharing you do, right?
figmentPez
Staff member
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
- Charge for gaming access. Want ping times lower than 500ms? Pay to have your gaming traffic put on priority or your multiplayer will be a lag-fest.
- Charge for any sort of home server usage. Want to stream from your PC / Pogo Plug / etc. to your laptop on the go? Pay up for streaming access or have your data blocked.
- Give preferential treatment to approved streaming video services. Hulu? It'll work fine if Hulu pays your ISP. Blip? Nah, videos from the Nostalgia Critic will take forever to load, if they do so at all, because Blip ain't one of their partners.
- Block/throttle VOIP communication unless you pay for their VOIP service. No more free Skype for you!
Let's not forget that they could, if they wanted:
- Charge for gaming access. Want ping times lower than 500ms? Pay to have your gaming traffic put on priority or your multiplayer will be a lag-fest.
- Charge for any sort of home server usage. Want to stream from your PC / Pogo Plug / etc. to your laptop on the go? Pay up for streaming access or have your data blocked.
- Give preferential treatment to approved streaming video services. Hulu? It'll work fine if Hulu pays your ISP. Blip? Nah, videos from the Nostalgia Critic will take forever to load, if they do so at all, because Blip ain't one of their partners.
- Block/throttle VOIP communication unless you pay for their VOIP service. No more free Skype for you!
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
- Charge for gaming access. Want ping times lower than 500ms? Pay to have your gaming traffic put on priority or your multiplayer will be a lag-fest.
- Charge for any sort of home server usage. Want to stream from your PC / Pogo Plug / etc. to your laptop on the go? Pay up for streaming access or have your data blocked.
- Give preferential treatment to approved streaming video services. Hulu? It'll work fine if Hulu pays your ISP. Blip? Nah, videos from the Nostalgia Critic will take forever to load, if they do so at all, because Blip ain't one of their partners.
- Block/throttle VOIP communication unless you pay for their VOIP service. No more free Skype for you![/QUOTE]
Don't forget that because major broadband services have parceled up the entire country, your local broadband provider is likely to only have 1-2 other competitors for your service who are often simply reselling the same data pipeline.
Let's not forget that they could, if they wanted:
- Charge for gaming access. Want ping times lower than 500ms? Pay to have your gaming traffic put on priority or your multiplayer will be a lag-fest.
- Charge for any sort of home server usage. Want to stream from your PC / Pogo Plug / etc. to your laptop on the go? Pay up for streaming access or have your data blocked.
- Give preferential treatment to approved streaming video services. Hulu? It'll work fine if Hulu pays your ISP. Blip? Nah, videos from the Nostalgia Critic will take forever to load, if they do so at all, because Blip ain't one of their partners.
- Block/throttle VOIP communication unless you pay for their VOIP service. No more free Skype for you![/QUOTE]
Don't forget that because major broadband services have parceled up the entire country, your local broadband provider is likely to only have 1-2 other competitors for your service who are often simply reselling the same data pipeline.
Necronic
Staff member
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
If the cable lines were managed like power lines, in that you could see actually competition on them, I wouldn't have a problem with this. Comcast decides to be a dick, then I start using someone else. The problem is that the internet industry is effectively a monopoly, as the lines are privately owned which therefore makes competition a joke at best.
We'll see how this pans out. Personally I could give less of a fuck about p2p. From where I stand it is a blight on bandwidth so good riddance. Question is how much further they decide to take it, and the fact that there is nothing to control how far they take it....I dunno. Probably won't be good.
If the cable lines were managed like power lines, in that you could see actually competition on them, I wouldn't have a problem with this. Comcast decides to be a dick, then I start using someone else. The problem is that the internet industry is effectively a monopoly, as the lines are privately owned which therefore makes competition a joke at best.
We'll see how this pans out. Personally I could give less of a fuck about p2p. From where I stand it is a blight on bandwidth so good riddance. Question is how much further they decide to take it, and the fact that there is nothing to control how far they take it....I dunno. Probably won't be good.
M
Matt²
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
my simplistic view is that the courts ruled that the FCC cannot dictate what is done on the internet.
However it looks like I may have had things backwards.. re-researching..looking for Kurtz's viewpoint...crud, I can't find it.. all I remember was a strip of Pvp with Harry Mudd enforcing his view on the internet (Captain Kirk).. and looks like I got it backwards. I'm sorry. I woohoo'd at the wrong moment.
my simplistic view is that the courts ruled that the FCC cannot dictate what is done on the internet.
However it looks like I may have had things backwards.. re-researching..looking for Kurtz's viewpoint...crud, I can't find it.. all I remember was a strip of Pvp with Harry Mudd enforcing his view on the internet (Captain Kirk).. and looks like I got it backwards. I'm sorry. I woohoo'd at the wrong moment.
figmentPez
Staff member
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
Other competitors? We have one cable company and no DSL where I live. The only other broadband option is satellite, as far as I know, and that's not a good alternative.
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
Satellite is a joke. My parents have it, and they even hit the 7 gig a month download limit. All they do is play farmville on facebook, check the weather, and look at farm auction sites.
Other competitors? We have one cable company and no DSL where I live. The only other broadband option is satellite, as far as I know, and that's not a good alternative.[/QUOTE]
Satellite is a joke. My parents have it, and they even hit the 7 gig a month download limit. All they do is play farmville on facebook, check the weather, and look at farm auction sites.
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.
Here it's Comcast or Verizon (or a Verizon re-seller, which amounts to the same thing).
Other competitors? We have one cable company and no DSL where I live. The only other broadband option is satellite, as far as I know, and that's not a good alternative.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.
Here it's Comcast or Verizon (or a Verizon re-seller, which amounts to the same thing).
people with graphic browsers?
ISP want to be able to regulate the internet? Good.
That makes them responsible for EVERYTHING that goes through their servers and down their lines. Before they had it like phone companies (as long as they kept their lines "dumb" they could not be held responsible for conversations that take place through them) treat it like a dumb pipe and the responsibility lied with those at either end.
That makes them responsible for EVERYTHING that goes through their servers and down their lines. Before they had it like phone companies (as long as they kept their lines "dumb" they could not be held responsible for conversations that take place through them) treat it like a dumb pipe and the responsibility lied with those at either end.
W
wana10
...are you a fan of the ACTA? cause the idea of my isp watching every packet in and out disgusts me.
D
Dusty668
From the Techdirt Article I just finished reading:
"That doesn't mean that Comcast should get off free for its actions. It should still be punished -- but by the FTC, rather than the FCC -- for misleading its customers about what type of service they were getting, and what the limitations were on those services. As for the FCC, if it really wants a more neutral net, it should focus on making sure that there's real competition in the market, rather than just paying lip service to the idea in its broadband plan."
Frankly I agree in theory, but in principle I don't see the FTC doing diddly.
"That doesn't mean that Comcast should get off free for its actions. It should still be punished -- but by the FTC, rather than the FCC -- for misleading its customers about what type of service they were getting, and what the limitations were on those services. As for the FCC, if it really wants a more neutral net, it should focus on making sure that there's real competition in the market, rather than just paying lip service to the idea in its broadband plan."
Frankly I agree in theory, but in principle I don't see the FTC doing diddly.
...are you a fan of the ACTA? cause the idea of my isp watching every packet in and out disgusts me.[/QUOTE]
I'm a fan of them getting slammed for child pornography distribution and other criminal acts, having their pants sued off for allowing their customers to access Copyrighted material, and generally having their business slammed to the point where they will beg for net neutrality.
figmentPez
Staff member
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
There aren't even resellers here as far as I know. It's led to really lousy customer service, because they know that there isn't any competition.Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.
Here it's Comcast or Verizon (or a Verizon re-seller, which amounts to the same thing).
Halforums.com post by Bigcountry23 are now "Premium content", please pay $20.00 to comcast to see them
FCC / Net Neutrality FAILS!
I'm lucky in that i have at least 3 options here in Ohio: Time Warner, Verizon, and AT&T. Time Warner is pretty good, for the price... especially as we have a land line still.
There aren't even resellers here as far as I know. It's led to really lousy customer service, because they know that there isn't any competition.[/QUOTE]Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.
Here it's Comcast or Verizon (or a Verizon re-seller, which amounts to the same thing).
I'm lucky in that i have at least 3 options here in Ohio: Time Warner, Verizon, and AT&T. Time Warner is pretty good, for the price... especially as we have a land line still.
Dave
Staff member
T
Totally Not Soliloquy
It should be noted, however, that some companies (Time Warner for one) have tried to limit it's users in some test markets and it failed spectacularly, with large groups of subscribers switching to competitors who didn't limit them. This FCC ruling only allows them to block content, it doesn't mean that it will be economically viable for them to do so.
figmentPez
Staff member
So those of us in markets with no real competition are still screwed?
C
Chazwozel
So those of us in markets with no real competition are still screwed?[/QUOTE]
No competitors will move in and try for a piece of that consumer pie.
figmentPez
Staff member
A few questions:
1. Why haven't they already? There are a lot of people who are already pissed about the service they're getting. We'd have switched if there were any other option. We regularly get stations where the color goes out, the picture gets staticky, closed captions are garbled or non-existent and Comcast has done nothing to fix this, insisting it's our television's fault. (It happens in every room in the house, without and without cable boxes. 5 different televisions with the same issues means the problem is not on our end.)
2. Is my understanding true, that competitors either need to get state/city approval to wire the area or they need to re-sell existing infastructure? If so, what's to keep Comcast, or whoever owns the cable, from forcing resellers to follow the same restrictions on P2P, VOIP, streaming video, gaming, etc.?
This isn't a case where just any competitor can lease a building and start selling their product. This is a utility, a part of city infrastructure. I'm not sure how it's regulated, but I'm sure it takes more than finding an empty building and signing a lease to set up shop providing a true alternative to existing internet services.
Pretty much. Hopefully it actually gets done.
---------- Post added at 09:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:23 AM ----------
Some companies have deals with cities saying they are the only company that can provide service in that area. Even if there aren't restrictions, it's insanely expensive and time consuming to get permits to dig peoples yards up and lay all that fiber or copper. The companies that already offer service don't need to do that. Cable is laid inside tubes so they can run new cable through it without as much digging.
I'm pretty sure most restrictions on reselling lines were removed. So even if they have to resell lines to another company they are most likely reselling it for close to, if not the same, price they sell to the customer. And yeah, Companies like AT&T could still filter traffic on their large internet backbones that everyone uses if they wanted.
Here's what a lot of the telco's are doing to smaller town's and areas with no competition. It's not that they can't afford it, it's just not in their best interest to upgrade if they don't have to.
- Status