Fcc approves net neutrality plan to control internet access

No, we don't need to go the "we'll see" route because we know where this going. More federal overlords, more federal intrusion into one of most creative market environments of all time, higher costs for people and businesses involved, less free market investment & less creative "for profit" incentive. And people who argue it'll level the playing field might want to think about that approach from the perspective that "fairness", as nice as sounds, is the motive for this, need to get honest. There's a frikkin reason the DC area has become a "must be there" spot for those evil rich folks you're always whining about, and I guarantee "fairness" isn't the it.

 

Everybody already has access if they want it. Oh I get it though....it's just more whining because someone may want something without paying for it...I guess liberals believe bandwidth is just free, free, free.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, mobile phones are very expensive compared to landlines.

 

Yes, of course they could, but they won't take it away from you, they'll just regulate who and how it's delivered to you. But I suspect this new round of NN will be the courts for a few years, so I doubt anything will change in foreseeable future. I suspect one of the primary reason the FCC withheld releasing the rules until AFTER they voting on them was because they didn't want a court challenge coming at them to quickly. They know it's coming, but this way they can allow Obama and his media team to launch their populist campaign supporting the new rules before the opposition has a chance to put their opposing arguments together.
I read today Obama's going after certain ammunition, making it illegal to sell to the public. That'll end up in court too along with his executive amnesty and his HC law. Obama's a god send for the legal eagles. Everything he does in his quest for "fundamental change" is so borderline legal it ends up in court. And he's the frikkin PRESIDENT????????????????? What's wrong with that picture! ???

 

This is a good thing people. When in doubt follow the money. Comcast and Time Warner were against this, Google and Netflix were for it. The reason Comcast and other cable providers were against it is because they now lose out on an additional income stream. Offering a "fast lane" is huge money. Right now everyone on this board has the same access to the internet. Every company, every person, EVERYONE!!!!! This is because its our internet. Comcast doesn't own the internet. Nor does Time Warner. It blows my mind that people think this a bad thing.

 

Nothing, which would be great if the cable companies weren't out to ruin it. Er, I mean, "innovate" it so they can get more money by delivering crappier service to the average user.

 

Free speech will only be silenced on the internet if they have liberals moderating it.

 

Oh come off it. Have we lost freedom to use the phone system since it became a utility? Nope. Has it been made available to every residence in the nation? Yep.

Meanwhile, do we already pay taxes and fees on the internet without it being a public utility? Yep!

Will this get worse with net neutrality in place? I don't know.. Will availability of broadband coverage improve the nation over? I don't know.. In the latter, unanswered questions, I think only time will tell. What I want to see is greater availability, greater average speeds and lower costs to match what the rest of the civilised world has been enjoying.

 

Were the cable companies' plans to regulate the internet any less secret? No, in fact, we have no idea what they were planning to do. But it isn't hard to imagine where profit was motivating them to go. The corporate-regulated internet is one where the people with money get a louder voice; the government-regulated internet is one where all people get equal voice. Last I checked, our democratic principles prefer the latter.

 

How do corporations "regulate?"

 

Lets just hope it doesn't wind up that EVERYONE will get (*)(*)(*)(*)ty bandwidth and EVERYONE's rates will go up faster than they do now.

 

Pricing

- - - Updated - - -

That has nothing to do with NN

 

You don't seem to understand the comment I was responding to.

 

The folks in the Firefox community think it's a great victory!

- - - Updated - - -

Most of these people barely understand what this is about.

All they do is shout "gubamint control" and "censorship" as opposed to "free market"/

They're just shouting their code words.

 

Five posts into this forum and I already don't understand. Please enlighten me. You asked a question, and I answered it. What am I missing?

 

Flaccid is right.

Businesses and corporations regulate with pricing all the time. But the fact is that the internet is no longer a luxury but a necessity, one that is particularly relevant to democracy. Businesses and corporations only want the wealthy to participate in democracy.

 

You know there is another thread full of Conservatives who have no idea what net neutrality is that you could have posted in.

 

Not at first, but once the feds get control of one facet, others will be soon to follow. I'd bet money on that.

 

You mean just like we have now...right?
Therefore where is the need for the government to come in stick their fingers in the internet pie? Why not stop and think about your position and why it doesn't make any sense, that is if your goal is to clarify things.

You may be a shill for government intervention on the internet for all I know.

 

"Net neutrality is the idea that websites or videos load at about the same speed. That means you won’t be more inclined to watch a particular show on Amazon Prime instead of on Netflix because Amazon has struck a deal with your service provider to load its data faster."​

*shrug* Sounds good to me.



​

 

Yes, it's a no-brainer, actually. Once the government gets involved they always get more involved and the rules and regulations and restrictions always accumulate. That's what government does, period and anyone who's studied history knows that. What's surprising is how many people fail to understand that much of the U.S. Constitution was designed to restrict what government could or could not do because the founding patriots understood the nature of government.

 

Governmental regulations= higher prices.

 

When cable companies started talking about charging extra to allow some people to have their data loaded faster is when the FCC started thinking to change the regulations. At least that's my understanding. Right now, that two tier system is not in place and there is reasonable net neutrality. The regulations enacted by the FCC are intended to continue that.

 

It's not about it being the first step in a larger plan to regulate free speech on the internet (though in fairness, they have done that with radio, TV, etc) - net neutrality itself is simply a program of price fixing. The state never changes.

And once they get their claws in, they'll never come out.

[hr][/hr]

Such a sad day for the internet and civil liberties advocates everywhere. Let's hope the courts, Congress, or a future FCC commission are able to reverse this fascist move.

 

ITT: conservatives don't think corporations in markets with negligible start up competition try to exploit that position.

 

Now, but before this we were in serious danger of that changing. Recently Comcast held Netflix at corporate gunpoint with stream throttling: http://www.cnet.com/news/cogent-say...connection-deal-with-clever-traffic-clogging/