Net Neutrality is dead. Its official. Edit: FCC's new rules protect Net Neutrality

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
302,087
Reputation
-34,036
Daps
611,636
Reppin
The Deep State
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/technology/fcc-new-net-neutrality-rules.html

TECHNOLOGY
F.C.C., in ‘Net Neutrality’ Turnaround, Plans to Allow Fast Lane
By EDWARD WYATTAPRIL 23, 2014

Photo
24net-web1-tmagSF.jpg

The proposed rules, drafted by Tom Wheeler, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, and his staff, would allow Internet service providers to charge companies for faster connection speeds
  • WASHINGTON — The Federal Communications Commission will propose new rules that allow Internet service providers to offer a faster lane through which to send video and other content to consumers, as long as a content company is willing to pay for it, according to people briefed on the proposals.

    The proposed rules are a complete turnaround for the F.C.C. on the subject of so-called net neutrality, the principle that Internet users should have equal ability to see any content they choose, and that no content providers should be discriminated against in providing their offerings to consumers.

    The F.C.C.'s previous rules governing net neutrality were thrown out by a federal appeals court this year. The court said those rules had essentially treated Internet service providers as public utilities, which violated a previous F.C.C. ruling that Internet links were not to be governed by the same strict regulation as telephone or electric service.

  • The new rules, according to the people briefed on them, will allow a company like Comcast or Verizon to negotiate separately with each content company – like Netflix, Amazon, Disney or Google – and charge different companies different amounts for priority service.

    That, of course, could increase costs for content companies, which would then have an incentive to pass on those costs to consumers as part of their subscription prices.

    Proponents of net neutrality have feared that such a framework would empower large, wealthy companies and prevent small start-ups, which might otherwise be the next Twitter or Facebook, for example, from gaining any traction in the market.

    The F.C.C. plans were first reported online Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal.

    The new proposals, drafted by the F.C.C.'s chairman, Tom Wheeler, and his staff, will be circulated to the other four commissioners beginning Thursday, an F.C.C. spokeswoman said. The details can be amended by consensus in order to attract support from a majority of the commissioners. The commission will then vote on a final proposal at its May 15 meeting.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
302,087
Reputation
-34,036
Daps
611,636
Reppin
The Deep State
Lets see

Corporate support : Check

Government support : Check

Mainstream media support :Check


You probably support this 100% :russ:
I don't. This is the most fukked up thing I've read about that probably 95% of people have NEVER heard about :snoop:
 

Broke Wave

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
18,700
Reputation
4,565
Daps
44,572
Reppin
Open Society Foundation
I don't. This is the most fukked up thing I've read about that probably 95% of people have NEVER heard about :snoop:

Ok I'll give you the benefit of the doubt because you're not 1 dimensional and are allowed to have a nuanced opinion...

Just don't excuse Obama for everything on earth because I got documented evidence now :sas2:



@Type Username Here Wassup with ya whole Socialist shtick now breh? I have been going to some socialist events and shyt like that like Cornell West was speaking etc (mainly to talk to some intelligent dimes :manny) but I just personally do not see the rational and factual basis for socialism. I mean socialism as we know it and marxism are really just euphemisms for communism and state confiscation of property, how can anyone support that from an empirical basis :huh:
 

tmonster

Superstar
Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
17,900
Reputation
3,205
Daps
31,786
it's comical
this will not work
the web is not simply a series of tubes
it's an organic community
it's nothing without the people
the people will find a way

and guess what? if there ever was a platform issue that no politician can twist or bait and switch it is this one
so holla at them boys in 2016
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
302,087
Reputation
-34,036
Daps
611,636
Reppin
The Deep State
At the end of the day, these bytch ass governments can't control the fukkin' internet. No matter what the fukk they do, we're gonna find a way around everything. It's not going to work.
ehhhhhhhhhh they kinda can though.

When the ISP starts throttling your shyt and the average person can't even gather the resources to create their own internet portal... you'll see how much the odds are stacked :sas1:
 

tmonster

Superstar
Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
17,900
Reputation
3,205
Daps
31,786
meanwhile in Europe

3 April 2014 Last updated at 09:28 ET
Share this page
Net neutrality law adopted by European Parliament
_73998245_sky.jpg
The law is designed to ensure internet providers treat all data equally
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories
The European Parliament has voted to restrict internet service providers' (ISPs) ability to charge data-hungry services for faster network access.

Operators have said the move would hinder their efforts to manage traffic.

The "net neutrality" proposal would put the EU at odds with the US, where video streaming service Netflix is paying the country's biggest cable firm for preferential treatment on its network.

The law still needs to be approved by Europe's Council of Ministers.

It would also prohibit mobile networks and broadband providers from blocking services - such as WhatApp messages or Google Drive storage - that compete with their own offerings.

Continue reading the main story
Child abuse row
Concerns have been raised that the net neutrality amendment passed in parliament could be exploited to allow child abuse images to be shared.

A section that originally stated that sites could be blocked if it was necessary to "implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes" was shortened in the final version to refer only to court orders.

At present a UK-based organisation called the Internet Watch Foundation maintains a list of web pages containing images of child abuse so that ISPs can block the content - a process that does not involve court orders.

As farfetched as it might seem that the EU would make it easier to share such material, some politicians do fear that the amendment in its current state could make this the case.

The Conservative Party's Vicky Ford MEP warned that the current draft was "dangerous" and said that it would have to be revised.

Labour's Richard Howitt MEP tweeted that he too opposed the proposed law, which he said "could weaken [the] fight against online child sex abuse images".

At present Slovenia and the Netherlands are the only members of the 28-nation bloc to enshrine the principle in law.

Enhanced services
The principle behind the proposed law is that all internet traffic should be treated equally regardless of its source.

MEPs feared that unless new rules were put in place, internet providers might threaten to slow down traffic from data intensive services - such as video-on-demand and cloud storage - unless the firms behind them paid a fee.

However, the mobile and cable firms have warned that the law would also prevent them from being able to offer enhanced services - for example charging a movie site a fee to ensure that their 4K ultra-high definition films played smoothly on consumers' devices when they might otherwise stutter.

"Whilst we support an open internet, a set of misconceptions about our industry, together with a rushed legislative process and a lack of technical analysis, risk transforming the Connected Continent Regulation into an anti-innovation and anti-consumer choice legislation," said a joint statement from four trade bodies representing cable and telecom operators.

_73998249_net.jpg
Netflix supports the principle of net neutrality but has agreed to pay the US's Comcast a fee for enhanced access
"The current draft legislative compromise in the European Parliament reflects very restrictive views on how the internet should work and on how specialised services with enhanced quality could be offered."

Stream safeguards
BT added that the UK's major ISPs currently operated under a voluntary code that promised to treat all traffic consistently, regardless of its source, which already provided "an extremely strong safeguard for the neutrality of the internet".

However, the news is being welcomed by others.

French digital rights campaign group La Quadrature du Net described the vote as being hugely important.

"The EU Parliament made clear that the internet commons should be free of corporate capture, and remain a space where freedom of communication and innovation can thrive," it said.

The BBC also signalled the law could also prove beneficial.

"The open internet remains a key distribution platform for existing offers like BBC iPlayer and innovative new services," said a spokesman.

"New EU laws could help sustain these benefits and be a welcome addition to the safeguards around the successful open internet model in the UK."

Higher costs
The proposal should mean subscription services - such as Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, Blinkbox and Sky Go - do not have to face raising their own charges to take account of new data speed fees from the ISPs.

_73998247_iplay.jpg
The BBC says new net neutrality laws could offer "welcome" safeguards
However, with telecom and cable companies needing to cover the cost of infrastructure upgrades to cope with increasing data demands, one market watcher warned that consumers should expect bigger bills.

"One way or another the costs will always be passed on to the end-user," said Chris Green, a tech analyst at the Davies Murphy Group consultancy.

"That could be through higher ISP charges: monthly broadband fees have been bottoming out for years and in many cases have been sold as loss leaders - that's likely to change off the back of this ruling."

He added that there were still ways for internet providers to charge additional fees, noting that several organisations already paid them to add special computer servers dedicated to storing their content to help save bandwidth.

"The ISPs can still charge the video providers to install data caching hardware inside their networks to enhance their services," Mr Green said.

A spokeswoman for the European Commission said that if the net neutrality proposal cleared its remaining hurdles, it could become law by the end of the year.


let me guess we can't do this here because of blah blah blah
 

Type Username Here

Not a new member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
16,369
Reputation
2,385
Daps
32,639
Reppin
humans
Ok I'll give you the benefit of the doubt because you're not 1 dimensional and are allowed to have a nuanced opinion...

Just don't excuse Obama for everything on earth because I got documented evidence now :sas2:



@Type Username Here Wassup with ya whole Socialist shtick now breh? I have been going to some socialist events and shyt like that like Cornell West was speaking etc (mainly to talk to some intelligent dimes :manny) but I just personally do not see the rational and factual basis for socialism. I mean socialism as we know it and marxism are really just euphemisms for communism and state confiscation of property, how can anyone support that from an empirical basis :huh:

First, if you think there isn't state confiscation of property under capitalism, I don't even know what to say. If you don't think there has been confiscation of property by non-state wealthy elites or companies, you need to read more about the un-incorporated Western United States, especially during the Gold Rush.

I support Democratic Socialism. There are many tenants of Marxism and Socialism, and Democratic Socialism makes the most sense. I see it as the eventual way society will work. I don't think Socialism is perfect nor do I support Marx's opinion of the eventual stateless society or disdain of private property. I also support a Social Democracy model that incorporates certain capitalist concepts as a means of compromise.
 

Broke Wave

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
18,700
Reputation
4,565
Daps
44,572
Reppin
Open Society Foundation
First, if you think there isn't state confiscation of property under capitalism, I don't even know what to say. If you don't think there has been confiscation of property by non-state wealthy elites or companies, you need to read more about the un-incorporated Western United States, especially during the Gold Rush.

I support Democratic Socialism. There are many tenants of Marxism and Socialism. I don't think Socialism is perfect nor do I support Marx's opinion of the eventual stateless society or disdain of private property. I also support a Social Democracy model that incorporates certain capitalist concepts as a means of compromise.

Oh true facts there definitely was state confiscation of property under capitalism like... Slavery etc hell we can ask the Natives about all that demonry but I just don't see how collectivization of everything is empirically gonna work ever but a lotta young intelligent minds unfortunately believe in this fantasy. It's literally akin to believing in a total free market like Libertarians.

I definitely support Dem Soc if I support anything. It's still not really Socialism and it's like kind of a misnomer. I definitely believe in nationalization of all natural resources a higher minimum wage etc etc all sort of "far left" ideas but those are far right idea's to Socialists because quite literally they want to end the market as we know it and I think that is just insanity :manny:
 
Top