Net Neutrality: what it is, and why you should care

Discussion in 'GBAtemp & Scene News' started by Chary, Nov 22, 2017.

  1. Memoir

    Memoir A Hero to Zero

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    Memoir is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    6,171
    6,122
    Jun 24, 2007
    United States
    Wyoming
    It's very confusing. I DO know that TWC and Charter merged. I'd be very confused if TWC held that much of the broadband market.
     
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  2. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    3,937
    2,709
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    AFAIK it's actually AT&T trying to acquire Time Warner. The Justice Department has sued to temporarily block the merger. I think AT&T only provides DSL, so they aren't really competing in the cable-broadband sector right now.
     
    Memoir likes this.
  3. Memoir

    Memoir A Hero to Zero

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    Memoir is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    6,171
    6,122
    Jun 24, 2007
    United States
    Wyoming
    That makes more sense. I actually was skimming through an article with AT&T saying they should be allowed to go through with the purchase... On the grounds that Comcast purchased NBC or something like that.
     
  4. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    3,937
    2,709
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    That was allowed to go through on the condition that Comcast/NBC not attempt to block their content from reaching other service providers and their customers. They've violated that promise several times over by now, so it's really a cautionary tale. Time Warner owns a lot of content, including HBO and CNN.
     
    Last edited by Xzi, Dec 10, 2017
    TotalInsanity4 and Memoir like this.
  5. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    398
    457
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    I've noticed an overwhelming amount of snark in reply to my post, but I suppose that's to be expected when the bulk of the Net Neutrality discussion is dominated by hyperactive 16 year olds that are terrified because of dumb campaigns by google and reddit to make you think your cat memes or whatever kids are after these days are under attack.

    The simple fact of the matter is that they aren't. I'm too lazy to go around quoting specific parts of different people's replies so I'm going to address them here. First and foremost, no one has paid any attention to the net neutrality """violations""" (which I will continue to address the """violations""" with as many condescending quotation marks as possible until they stop being non-issues or start being related to internet neutrality) and their context, only that people like FreePress and so on see them as threats. In the unlikely event the proposal (which I implore all of you to sit and read before flipping out further) even goes through, who is to say it won't get lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit ad-infinitum until the proposal is killed and proper rules are put in place, should ISPs do anything undesirable? I would like to remind everyone that to this day ISPs *STILL* throttle you. Source: https://www.infoworld.com/article/2...hrottle-traffic-and-the-fcc-cant-stop-it.html

    The current net neutrality rules are not working. They're heavily restrictive and end up getting companies in hot water legally because too many uninformed people start clambering over each other over hearsay and rumors to have the heads of companies on a plate in front of them. Remember when Vonage was throttled by a celluar service provider and everyone screeched "ZOMG MUH NEUTRALITY" and the entire reason was literally because the network, which was 2G, slowly but surely transitioning into 3G (and thus requiring more maintenance) was heavily overloaded and the constant use of services like Vonage was congesting it?

    How about when BitTorrent and similar clients would drag internet services to their *KNEES* to the point ISPs like Comcast either had to throttle, or the service would be fucked for everyone? Mind you, they only throttled during peak hours, and on illegal torrents. If it was, say, a torrent for a Linux distro, you could torrent/seed away happily. Kinda ironic that the outrage from that was mostly from people who were breaking the law, and felt unfairly treated.

    Now granted that's a bit of a strawman, so how about the fact that if any company wanted to get a foothold on the market since long before these archaic, overbearing rules were put in place, and offer fast lanes, packages, and all sorts of other garbage -- which I'd like to stress here that I'd be *LIVID* if that stuff came my way, but it's not going to so there's no reason for all this outrage about what's at absolute worst a potential thing that will result in economic suicide for any company dumb enough to try it -- how come it wasn't widespread? The net neutrality doctrine has not been the same way for 10-20 years. Only in the past 3 or so years have such rules come into play. Why is it that in the absence of such rules -- which is what we'll be going back to should the proposal pass -- the internet did not implode upon itself, or turn into this big wild west shitfest?

    Oh yeah, because any ISP that would be stupid enough to do that may as well burn their money, sell their shares to monkeys, and just get wasted. In my area, I have an ISP that's primarily composed of people fed up with AT&T's terrible services and practices. You know what happened? AT&T started lowering their prices, improving their services -- both support and general internet service -- and now there's fair competition. I don't care how scummy businesses are and can be, it's ridiculous to assume that these people have absolutely no interest in the world but destroying your internet for the sake of money. The absolute worst they'd do that people would be okay with is sell packages or something, and I say people would be okay with it because you can just neglect to purchase the stuff you know for a fact you don't need or don't care about, and that stuff wouldn't even be blocked without it, you just wouldn't have max speed.

    Furthermore while the evidence is anecdotal I've been throttled numerous times, had websites just straight up not connect, be redirected to other sites, and a whole slew of unkosher stuff from AT&T, as I have multiple friends with similar experiences. So either, the current rules aren't doing anything and need to be removed so we can instill better rules and actually sit down and enforce them, or net neutrality is just a big stupid meme that doesn't actually stop the bad stuff everyone's panicking about, and what's *really* stopping the implosion of the internet is just good ol' capitalism.

    tl;dr this debate is plagued with uneducated, overemotional teenagers scared of losing memes and piracy more than it is with people who know what the proposal entails, why it's being proposed, what the history behind the stuff the proposal will change is, and so on. Before you type up some stupidly long wall of text about how you "should care otherwise you're not informed," you should stop, read proposals yourself, close out of sites like Gizmodo or Reddit, and actually come up with your own ideas. Quite frankly, this sort of behavior is precisely why Ajit Pai doesn't talk to you people about this. This isn't about "ignoring the american people," it's about ignoring the masses who clearly don't care what's really going on and are instead deluding themselves with fear mongering and propaganda. I dislike some parts of his proposal -- specifically how ISPs will no longer have to disclose their packet loss averages, something that I consider important to making informed decisions about services -- but ultimately Ajit Pai, like all of us, is a flawed human being who can make mistakes. Some harmless, some stupid, but none of them, at least in this scenario, irreversible.

    tl;dr;dr calm down holy shit this isn't a big deal
     
    Last edited by MaverickWellington, Dec 11, 2017
    DarthDub likes this.
  6. Memoir

    Memoir A Hero to Zero

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    Memoir is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    6,171
    6,122
    Jun 24, 2007
    United States
    Wyoming
    There's too many buzzwords used in this NN nonsense that it's really hard to take a side. It's easy to say that without it? Your ISP would be able to legally screw you with paid fast lanes for certain sites and ad content... It's also easy to say that it keeps the ISPs at bay and lets you do more of what you like without worry of paywalls. Personally? I have no Idea. I'm on the fence for a lot of reasons. "It's good!" "It's bad!"...

    At the end of the day? I'm still struggling to make ends meet. So, there's that.
     
  7. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    3,937
    2,709
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    The fuck are you talking about? The current rules are fine, and nobody would be complaining about any of these companies if they were willing to continue doing the right thing. The only reason anybody cares is because they're trying to repeal Net Neutrality, and I'm sorry, they're not doing it "just for teh lulz." Corporations care about money, they don't give a fuck about you or me, and if you believe otherwise you're in for a very rude awakening soon enough.
     
    RedBlueGreen and TotalInsanity4 like this.
  8. the_randomizer

    the_randomizer The Temp's official fox whisperer

    Member
    23,383
    11,307
    Apr 29, 2011
    United States
    Dr. Wahwee's castle
    But what I want to know is, how was the internet, its state, etc before these NN rules were implemented? I'm genuinely curious.
     
  9. Memoir

    Memoir A Hero to Zero

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    Memoir is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    6,171
    6,122
    Jun 24, 2007
    United States
    Wyoming
    A giant meme before memes were cool.
     
  10. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    3,937
    2,709
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    I've commented on this previously, but it started getting bad right before Net Neutrality was finally implemented. Netflix and League of Legends were definitely being throttled because of the amount of bandwidth they were taking up.

    A few years prior to that, things were fine because it wasn't just two giant ISPs controlling everything.
     
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  11. Memoir

    Memoir A Hero to Zero

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    Memoir is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    6,171
    6,122
    Jun 24, 2007
    United States
    Wyoming
    Oh, yeah the Netflix debacle.

    Didn't know online gaming was taking a hit. This was also back when I knew nothing of it.
     
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  12. the_randomizer

    the_randomizer The Temp's official fox whisperer

    Member
    23,383
    11,307
    Apr 29, 2011
    United States
    Dr. Wahwee's castle
    Hmm, as much as this is a heated topic, it may be more productive for people to approach this logically; doesn't mean people can't be upset or what have you, but being levelheaded about issues like this is far more productive than having outlets spreading fear. That's my opinion however, if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. *Sigh*.
     
    ThisIsDaAccount likes this.
  13. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    398
    457
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    Precisely this. Too many people are screeching and being extreme about everything and a fraction of them -- maybe 10 of them out of like, a million -- are reading the damn proposal and figuring out what's going to happen. I'm sure people like Xzi aren't aware of the fact that the new proposal will require that ISPs specifically announce any behavior like throttling, blocking, lanes, etc on a very clearly visible section of their sites that, in the words of the document itself (https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-347927A1.pdf ) "must be clearly navigable and legible by even the disabled."

    The whole reason ISPs have been getting away with sneaky shit is because they don't have to tell anyone. I've had to go through support clerk after support clerk to the point I went to like 5 people before they finally just said "Yes, we're throttling, there's issues with our infrastructure right now." Look at all this outrage. Do you legitimately think people this livid about the *POSSIBILITY* they might get throttled/blocked/lanes/whatever would even consider purchasing internet from an ISP that openly states they're gonna do that? No. Without overbearing regulations as well, smaller ISPs can actually compete with the bigger ones instead of buyouts turning everything into some giant blob of whatever like play-dough having all the colors mashed together, so if one ISP thinks they can be a dumbshit, the other ones are going to smack them into line by taking their customers, and I know this happens because I've literally experienced it myself.

    "The current rules are fine" is the calling card of someone who does not understand the rules, their flaws, the kind of loopholes that ISPs exploit, and so on. I don't think you understand what I'm getting at here, primarily that if the proposal passes, nothing bad will come from it, and if anything we'll get more specific, less ridiculous regulation that allows other ISPs to compete instead of, as stated, everything else being a stupid blob. Corporations care about money. No shit. Which is exactly why they won't actively try to fuck over customers just to bleed them for money. It will be literal economic suicide. Corporations love money so much that they will literally abuse loopholes in current regulations in order to squeeze as much money out of other people as possible. http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...exploited-a-gaping-loophole-in-net-neutrality

    You can verify this by looking at how stocks drop significantly whenever an ISP gets into a lot of trouble from lawsuits regarding shit behavior. Comcast has had it, AT&T has had it, Verizon has had it, and so on. To fuck your customers is to fuck your wallet, and yourself. So I ask, what the fuck are *you* talking about? Because it's not the bigger picture, it's not the smaller picture, is it even a picture at all? Where's your outrage over Netflix throttling shit for people on specific ISPs? I thought you cared about Net Neutrality, but evidently not.
     
    DarthDub likes this.
  14. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    3,937
    2,709
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    This is not about fear, it's about keeping internet freedom. Assuming Net Neutrality is repealed, you'll still be able to access everything you could before, but you'll be deterred from certain sites by 56K loading times. It's not some big mystery why your ISP would want to do this to you, for them it's about the ad revenue.

    This argument hinges on the fact that internet service is optional, but it's very much mandatory for a lot of people. Most would keep their ISP even if rates were hiked by an extra $20 a month. If they lose some customers but ultimately still pull in more profit, then obviously they're not gonna care about the people they lost.
     
    Last edited by Xzi, Dec 11, 2017
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  15. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    398
    457
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    That's what I'm saying. It's admittedly making me mad that all these kids are flooding in from sites like 4chan and reddit and are muddying the entire discussion with "B-B-B-BUT ARE THEY G-GONNA TAKE AWAY MY V-VIDEO GAMES AND A-ANIME?"

    I think this is honestly just corporate shenanigans that either won't affect the consumer, or give us way more options in the long run. Hell, the FCC is strengthening the FTC's power against anti-competitive practices (such as ISPs preventing other companies from using their lines and so on) so that we get some actual competition, especially in rural areas.

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    Seriously though how has no one tried to fix Net Neutrality's flawed, gaping lawset?
    https://www.wired.com/2015/11/comcast-may-have-found-a-major-net-neutrality-loophole/
    I mean look at this, it's literally anti-competitive.
     
    DarthDub likes this.
  16. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    3,937
    2,709
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    Man you're just not living in the real world here. There is no competition in broadband ISPs any more, and it's not because Net Neutrality killed it. It's because Comcast and Time Warner bought out all the competition and now try to shut down any efforts for community or local ISPs. Where you think more competition is magically going to appear from is beyond me. Why you think Comcast/TWC have ever been or will ever be benevolent to their customers is also beyond me. It already seems like they derive pleasure from customers' hatred of their poor business practices.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    398
    457
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    My ass-backwards southern state has 11 service providers in my city alone, only 2 of which belong to AT&T -- the rest are all smaller companies, sans one, which is just Comcast's XFinity service. If one company starts acting dumb, another could so capitalize on it by *not* being dumb. It's economics 101. If I knew how to word it in google I guarantee you I could get over a thousand examples of it happening in corporate/economic history. Squeezing extra money out of people and pissing them off vs not suckling them for money when other ISPs do, and thus bringing a great amount of people to you. Obviously the second one will garner more income. Others will look at this success and go "oh, okay, don't be (shitty ISP) here, be (good ISP) here."

    Quit focusing on the "all corporations wanna do is just treat you like shit for money" meme. Yes, they're out to make money, but they aren't out to commit economic suicide.

    "There's no competition anymore!"
    Yeah uh, no shit? Because the current rules regulate smaller ISPs significantly harder than they regulate the much larger ISPs, who half the time just break the rules anyways. Maybe if you had read the proposal instead of reddit you'd see the FCC plans to give the FTC the jurisdiction to tell ISPs "hey, fuck off, you're trying to run a monopoly here and we're not having it."

    But at least you got to post a south park meme, surely you're lmaoing your butts in the floor right now from that one.
     
    Last edited by MaverickWellington, Dec 11, 2017
    DarthDub likes this.
  18. the_randomizer

    the_randomizer The Temp's official fox whisperer

    Member
    23,383
    11,307
    Apr 29, 2011
    United States
    Dr. Wahwee's castle
    And again, there may be massive backlash from the public, i.e the nationwide protests, we don't know for sure if there will be a huge legal mess from people suing, etc, to keep this in place. There's no denying that there is still a bit of fear mongering going on, that's all. With that said... maybe I..never mind.
     
  19. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    3,937
    2,709
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    I'm guessing exactly one that's cable internet and not some DSL/satellite BS that runs at 56K speeds already?

    There are lawsuits happening already, but I doubt they'll delay the repeal.
     
  20. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    398
    457
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    Not including the duplicate AT&T service, it's 3 actually, and the speeds are all pretty damn good.

    [​IMG]
    Also for anyone thinking there's never gonna be competition on the level of big ISPs keep in mind my ISP covers almost as much as AT&T. Expect to see more ISP competition as the awful regulations get removed.
     
    Last edited by MaverickWellington, Dec 11, 2017
    DarthDub likes this.