The FCC plans to vote away net neutrality in December

[the_randomizer]

That's the case for literally (this is a statistic) 75% of the country, they just have one big ISP.

Yeah, and Comcast can go to hell for being a part of this.

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

Don't worry about Gbatemp. It's not a big site like reddit. Also, if there's demand, someone will offer.

Yeah, the GBATemp thing is just an example, I'm more worried about stuff like reddit and Discord being slowed down, or thngs like Mega being banned. It's quite possible GBAtemp will get blocked too though, not specifically but it could get labeled as "modding-related" and blocked along with others.

And if that happens, there's no one to switch to. I have only Comcast.

 

[the_randomizer]

Yeah, the GBATemp thing is just an example, I'm more worried about stuff like reddit and Discord being slowed down, or thngs like Mega being banned. It's quite possible GBAtemp will get blocked too though, not specifically but it could get labeled as "modding-related" and blocked along with others.

And if that happens, there's no one to switch to. I have only Comcast.

That's why people need to be educated and fight back.

 

[Zhongtiao1]

You guys are going overboard, just because regulation is there to revoke something, doesn't mean it will actually happen, or that it will be implemented fully.

 

[the_randomizer]

You guys are going overboard, just because regulation is there to revoke something, doesn't mean it will actually happen, or that it will be implemented fully.

How do you know that?

 

[Zhongtiao1]

How do you know that?

Because history

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

You guys are going overboard, just because regulation is there to revoke something, doesn't mean it will actually happen, or that it will be implemented fully.

Fair enough point.

However, id like to remind people Verizon sued for the right to do it. If they sued for it, it seems logical that they plan to do it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Communications_Inc._v._FCC_(2014)

 

[RandomUser]

Oh there will be backlash for sure.

You know, some how I don't think there will be very much backlashes. At least not in a way were it gets very violence towards those responsible for reascending net neutrality.
The reason being is now a days I am seeing a lot of people are too friggen' pacifist here in the US.
Now I realize you might think what about that "Not My President" protest riot after Trump been elected. Problem with this, is vandalism was not actually directed at Trump. Random things were vandalize and no violence ever took place towards Trump which is a big difference between vandalizing nearby structure and actually letting the perpetrator "have it" per se.
Perhaps this time people will actually go berserk, who knows and I could be wrong?

 

[ThoD]

You know, some how I don't think there will be very much backlashes. At least not in a way were it gets very violence towards those responsible for reascending net neutrality.
The reason being is now a days I am seeing a lot of people are too friggen' pacifist here in the US.
Now I realize you might think what about that "Not My President" protest riot after Trump been elected. Problem with this, is vandalism was not actually directed at Trump. Random things were vandalize and no violence ever took place towards Trump which is a big difference between vandalizing nearby structure and actually letting the perpetrator "have it" per se.
Perhaps this time people will actually go berserk, who knows and I could be wrong?

About the Trump "protests", it was just assholes who ruined private properties of other people like them, cars, houses, etc., it was just an excuse to go out and ruin someone's life without doing any actual protesting! Hard working, good people suffered damages from those assholes, rather than all that "protesting" being directed at Trump.

Moving on now, thing is that nowadays no one really cares about protests and all that, it mostly happens online, so if they so much as want to, they can easily cut off your access to the major platforms and silence you, thus there won't be a backlash for the most part. Sure, people can riot or pay more money to be able to get some attention, but it won't be enough.

Anyway, it only affects the US, so it's literally a 1st world problem, but there's something good that could come out of this, less idiots online! /s

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

About the Trump "protests", it was just assholes who ruined private properties of other people like them, cars, houses, etc., it was just an excuse to go out and ruin someone's life without doing any actual protesting! Hard working, good people suffered damages from those assholes, rather than all that "protesting" being directed at Trump.

Moving on now, thing is that nowadays no one really cares about protests and all that, it mostly happens online, so if they so much as want to, they can easily cut off your access to the major platforms and silence you, thus there won't be a backlash for the most part. Sure, people can riot or pay more money to be able to get some attention, but it won't be enough.

Anyway, it only affects the US, so it's literally a 1st world problem, but there's something good that could come out of this, less idiots online! /s

But I'm an idiot . . . and i love going online

In all truth, I agree that there will be no significant protest if it happens. I think they'll just get what they want, sadly.

 

[RedBlueGreen]

Honestly, I don't really care about it. Since the FCC can only enforce it in the US, the rest of the world will just keep going on with their lives, but less burdened by idiots (not all, just a ridiculously high %) Though I can understand why people complain about it. Want to get support on this? Explain to the masses that they won't have access to porn anymore and watch support against the FCC rise instantly!

It could still affect other countries though. If your ISP has a parent company based in the US then it might affect whoever has them. In Canada we pretty much only have a few major ISPs because the government has given them such a monopoly and restricts competitors business so they can't take any serious amount of business away from the big guys. So if they folloe suit you either play by their rules or you switch to a smaller ISP which tend to be a lot slower and less reliable.

If this thing does pass, couldn't people just use VPNs? If that works it seems much more logical to pay for that than to pay an extortionate ISP for the right to use certain sites.

 

[ThoD]

It could still affect other countries though. If your ISP has a parent company based in the US then it might affect whoever has them. In Canada we pretty much only have a few major ISPs because the government has given them such a monopoly and restricts competitors business so they can't take any serious amount of business away from the big guys. So if they folloe suit you either play by their rules or you switch to a smaller ISP which tend to be a lot slower and less reliable.

Here, it's impossible for anything like revoking net neutrality to happen for one simple reason, we got a LOT of ISP and even though there is a main one that provides the infrastructure to all the others and is the fastest, the difference is hardly 5-10MB/s so it's not bad at all. If anyone pulls something like this, all the people will just move to a different ISP and that main one I mentioned would never pull this kind of thing for the simple reason that it's a government-assisted private company, meaning it is fundamental and anything this big would ruin both of them. Also, if that were to happen, the other ISPs would swoop in to take over the main lines!

Anyway, since the whole FCC thing will never affect me in any way bigger than simply less people doing stuff online, I don't really care and I'm kinda annoyed by how people keep talking about it but don't do anything to actually prevent it! Petitions never do anything, saying you support something doesn't do a thing, all that matters is action and if all you do is stay behind your computer signing petitions and complaining about it, then it's your fault if they take away the net neutrality.

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

It could still affect other countries though. If your ISP has a parent company based in the US then it might affect whoever has them. In Canada we pretty much only have a few major ISPs because the government has given them such a monopoly and restricts competitors business so they can't take any serious amount of business away from the big guys. So if they folloe suit you either play by their rules or you switch to a smaller ISP which tend to be a lot slower and less reliable.

If this thing does pass, couldn't people just use VPNs? If that works it seems much more logical to pay for that than to pay an extortionate ISP for the right to use certain sites.

They could just block traffic to vpns, I believe.

 

[RedBlueGreen]

Here, it's impossible for anything like revoking net neutrality to happen for one simple reason, we got a LOT of ISP and even though there is a main one that provides the infrastructure to all the others and is the fastest, the difference is hardly 5-10MB/s so it's not bad at all. If anyone pulls something like this, all the people will just move to a different ISP and that main one I mentioned would never pull this kind of thing for the simple reason that it's a government-assisted private company, meaning it is fundamental and anything this big would ruin both of them. Also, if that were to happen, the other ISPs would swoop in to take over the main lines!

Anyway, since the whole FCC thing will never affect me in any way bigger than simply less people doing stuff online, I don't really care and I'm kinda annoyed by how people keep talking about it but don't do anything to actually prevent it! Petitions never do anything, saying you support something doesn't do a thing, all that matters is action and if all you do is stay behind your computer signing petitions and complaining about it, then it's your fault if they take away the net neutrality.

I really don't think there would be any practical way to protest it though. Even if thousands of people stood around government buildings I don't think it would change a thing. The guy pushing for the removal of net neutrality is a former Verizon lawyer so he's motivated by financial gain, as are the ISPs. They're not gonna care how people feel unless millions of people switch to smaller companies where available. If it doesn't affect thwir business they could care less.

 

[Zhongtiao1]

You know, some how I don't think there will be very much backlashes. At least not in a way were it gets very violence towards those responsible for reascending net neutrality.
The reason being is now a days I am seeing a lot of people are too friggen' pacifist here in the US.
Now I realize you might think what about that "Not My President" protest riot after Trump been elected. Problem with this, is vandalism was not actually directed at Trump. Random things were vandalize and no violence ever took place towards Trump which is a big difference between vandalizing nearby structure and actually letting the perpetrator "have it" per se.
Perhaps this time people will actually go berserk, who knows and I could be wrong?

Umm... What's wrong with pacifism exactly?

 

[Deleted User]

who else plans to riot or take to the streets if it goes down?
im gonna protest int he streets but not riot cuz im lazy

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

Instead of protesting the repeal of net neutrality, I recommend you do two things:

1) Use this link that @keven3477 posted to express on your thoughts on net neutrality:
http://www.gofccyourself.com/
If the FCC passes the repeal in spite of large amounts of dissenting comments, they can legally be sued. If you want that to happen, leave a comment!!!!

2) Pick up the phone and call your Senators, and tell them that you will refuse to vote for them again if they do not do something to secure net neutrality. You should especially call your senators if they voted in favor of re nominating Ajit Pai. If you open up the list of votes in the Senate, you'll see that the vote was generally partisan, with Republicans voting in favor of Pai, and Democrats voting against (with the expecting on of 4 Republicans and 4 Democrats). It's up to us, their constituents, to make it known that the issue is not a partisan issue to us, it's an issue of common sense.


Your indication of disapproval may seem like little, but I can promise you it's not.

 

[keven3477]

Glad to know I had trouble finding my comment with all the other ones from today. Maybe I should have said more or is this all right.

 

[AmandaRose]

This *may* be possible in the case of cellular service, because there's several providers. In terms of broadband (modern home internet) however, there's either Comcast or Time Warner, but never both because they don't compete in the same places.

If Comcast or Time Warner start saying, example, that they don't want people access GBATemp, then that's that, because there's no other significant competitors to switch to. There's no option of moving on to a better service.

So are you seriously saying America only has 2 broadband providers?? Because if so why?? I live in Scotland which i am sure you know a quite small country of only 5 million people and we have at least 15 broadband service providers and probably a few more i cant think of at the moment. Why on earth does America only have two.

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

So are you seriously saying America only has 2 broadband providers?? Because if so why?? I live in Scotland which i am sure you know a quite small country of only 5 million people and we have at least 15 broadband service providers and probably a few more i cant think of at the moment. Why on earth does America only have two.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_broadband_providers_in_the_United_States


There are several broadband providers in the US, but most are very small and don't reach many people. Most people in the us just have one broadband provider in their area.

If you look at the list, a lot of the big companies on it don't even offer home internet, only cellular. The two major broadband providers for homes are Comcast and Time Warner (edit: charter, not time warner, time warner is their cable service). Time Warner and Comcast don't compete in the same areas, basically avoiding each other. That's why most people only have one possible broadband provider - Comcast or Time Warner.

In fact, take a look at this graph:

Broadband is column 3. The graph indicates 47 % of Americans hsve only one broadband provider (with 30% having none). There aren't many options for us.


The reason why this happened is a long and complex story. The summary is that the market is pretty monopolistic these days.